To:
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, Jakob Schlyter <jakob@crt.se>
Cc:
<dnssec@cafax.se>
From:
Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com>
Date:
Mon, 14 May 2001 12:16:00 -0400
Delivery-Date:
Tue May 15 07:54:01 2001
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.BSO.4.33.0105120901110.27899-100000@fonbella.crt.se>
Sender:
owner-dnssec@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Keys at apex problem - New PUBKEY RR?
It seems we've come to a stalemated debate. On the one hand there is the desire to simplify DNS (a trait of operations is toward easy-to-run systems). On the other hand is the desire to extend DNS (a trait of engineering is to grow things). As I said before, I understand both sides of the issue, I see merits to both arguements. But I agree more with Jakob on this. Eric Hall summed up the reason I disagree with Randy very well in a message he sent on namedroppers (dated Sun, 13 May 2001 12:21:28 -0700). Paraphrasing Eric, the reason why I am against restricting the use of DNS (in this manner) is because of a lack of evidence that the use is detrimental. "Lack of evidence" is the important phrase here. I repeat that I understand where Randy is coming from - creeping featurism is a menance to society - but outside of a theoretical/conceptual argument, I don't think adding a feature is a problem. I'll allow myself one analogy - radios in cars. (I'm certain the original car did not have a radio.) A radio provides distraction for the driver, adds weight, theoretically it is a problem, but has other advantages that outweigh these problems. So the radio is in cars today. Before we go around once more in the debate of whether the keys even belong in DNS, I'd like to get the evidence that says this (or this kind of) extension will cause a problem. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Edward Lewis NAI Labs Phone: +1 443-259-2352 Email: lewis@tislabs.com You fly too often when ... the airport taxi is on speed-dial. Opinions expressed are property of my evil twin, not my employer.