Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Call for Adoption: draft-hardaker-dnsop-rfc8624-bis, must-not-sha1, must-not-ecc-gost

[Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>]

Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> writes:

> This cull-because-of-low usage thread incorrectly assumes that the DNS
> is flat instead of a hierarchy.

A few points:

1. I only pointed at data that people were asking for.  I did not state
my personal opinion.

2. I published the drafts based on desires by people to have them
published.  I'm at the will of the WG in the long run with respect to
publishing vs not (as all document authors should be).

3. The whole discussion, IMHO, is side-stepping the real issue: if not
now, then when?  IE, do we never put something at MUST NOT?  Is there a
usage threshold?  Is it "must be zero"?  Is it "known to be broken and
everyone must have a flag day instead of a slower process"?

These are not easy questions, and there does seem to be many different
opinions.  RedHat led the pack(ish), and maybe Paul and others will be
the tail end at some very late value.  There is no right or wrong, and
the line of people are likely to spread out along the timeline.

And what makes the situation worse is not whether or not "we" want the
timeline to have a fixed transition point, but the roll out and adoption
and abandoning of older software in the DNS(SEC) landscape takes a
really really long time.  So the trade off of when to say "stop using
this" vs "all software has already stopped using it" has a really really
long gap in the middle.  There is no perfect.

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI