Re: [DNSOP] Current DNS standards, drafts & charter

[Job Snijders <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 09:13:31AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > Finally, with Job Snijders, I am very much in favour of mandating
> > interoperable implementations as a requirement for standards action.
> > There is a whole bunch of reasons for this.  For starters, how can we
> > know if an idea is good without having tried it?
> 
> ....but, i think that multiple interoperable implementations is
> already a minimum benchmark, and i think it's IETF-wide, not optional,
> and has always been in effect here.

Nope, that is not the case. This is why IDR has explicit Working
Group-specific rules regarding this topic. Please review
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/9f3W3YcmFLvXq4ZFOsteyCgxhHY

> what i'd like is something more. KEY, SIG and NXT had multiple
> interoperable implementations, but were not actually functional in any
> end-to-end way, and were thus replaced by RRSIG, DNSKEY, DS, and NSEC.
> later we moved the target and added NSEC3 and then NSEC3PARAM.
> 
> so while multiple interoperable implementations are a minimum
> benchmark, i'd like to see some kind of scale model as well. making
> something work on a whiteboard, or in a test lab, or on one's laptop,
> does not mean it will work on today's or tomorrow's internet.
> 
> this just amplifies my interpretation of your term, "having tried it."

Agreed.

Kind regards,

Job