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

[David Conrad]

I would've thought 'production' vs. 'semi-production' would have been  
related to SLAs associated with the infrastructure DLV operates over,  
not features on the web interface or backend APIs.  After all, you all  
are suggesting people to bet their DNS lookup infrastructure on ISC's  
DLV infrastructure not breaking...

Regards,
-drc

On Mar 21, 2009, at 5:11 PM, Michael Graff wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 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.)
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAknFghkACgkQLdqv0r6eD6aGnACfRaDnheMkNPQMWdSIpQkPMEuA
> G3YAn1Mt0d+i37r9ZeqV/a5OGoKSTFhi
> =RBCW
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
>