[dns-operations] dlv.isc.org "full production" [was: Re: Statement: Issues using BIND 9.4 & 9.5 with DLV and certain DNSSEC-signed zones]

Michael Graff michael_graff at isc.org
Sun Mar 22 00:11:05 UTC 2009

Hash: SHA1

Considering that we are discussing plans for a bulk API for large volume
submissions, have spent a fairly large chunk of money in my time doing
the web UI, and have plans for more...  I'd say that speaks louder than
three year old words.

The world changes every day, surely we're allowed to make changes with it.

The original hope for DLV was that it would become a roaring success to
aid in early deployment, and then fade away when the root and enough
TLDs were signed.  Perhaps that is still its fate, who knows what the
future holds.  However, in the years dlv.isc.org has been there, I
certainly have not seen a lot of roaring successes anywhere in the
DNSSEC space.

I personally feel that DLV will be around for a considerable number of
years even after the root and the major TLDs are signed.  There will
always be gaps in the signing chain, and DLV fills those wonderfully.

- --Michael

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> 	well...  i might refer folks to some historical posts from
> 	Paul Vixie...  granted, he's not claiming direct responsibility
> 	for DLV, but he is president of ISC...  so his musings might
> 	carry a little weight.
> 	for example:
> From: Paul Vixie <paul at vix.com>
> To: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: wrt joao damas' DLV talk on wednesday
> Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 06:50:05 +0000
> Message-ID: <77813.1150008605 at sa.vix.com>
> [lengthy diatribe elided]
> (my concern is, DLV is an evolutionary dead end, a deployment
> aid, and pissing away even more time and money on it seems like a waste of
> time compared to finishing NSEC3, signing the root, y'know, important stuff.)

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the dns-operations mailing list