[dns-operations] unfounded showstopper assertions

Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Mar 6 20:50:59 UTC 2017

> On 6 Mar 2017, at 20:05, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill at hallambaker.com> wrote:
> I have never ever encountered a situation in which an employee of company X has said that 'Y is a show stopper issue for us, we cannot deploy unless it is addressed' and company Y has subsequently deployed.

You must have been elsewhere during the DNSSEC protocol war 10-12 years ago.

Back then various employees, managers and board members of several TLD registries said they would never deploy DNSSEC unless the IETF found a solution to their zone enumeration concerns. This was a showstopper for them. ISTR those very words being used at that time too. At least one registry went ahead and deployed DNSSEC-bis (zone enumeration included), securing their TLD without waiting a further 5 years or so until DNSSEC-ter was ready. They’re still using DNSSEC-bis today.

However that existence proof is just detail.

It’s simply absurd for you to assert that if company X says “foo is a showstopper for us”, that automatically makes foo a showstopper for company Y. One company’s showstopper is by definition another company’s gap in the market or business opportunity.

More information about the dns-operations mailing list