This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[dns-wg] Re: Another DNSSEC action: add your DS to DLV (Was: NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: Another DNSSEC action: add your DS to DLV (Was: NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: Another DNSSEC action: add your DS to DLV (Was: NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
David Conrad
drc at virtualized.org
Thu Oct 23 22:52:21 CEST 2008
Shane, On Oct 23, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Shane Kerr wrote: > David, > > On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 09:14 -0700, David Conrad wrote: >>> This does not scale. >> True, however it does scale for TLDs. > I disagree, for my own (admittedly lazy) sysadmin standards. Apologies, I elided a bit much. I was saying the ITAR scales for TLDs. It can be argued that it most likely won't scale as a general (that is, more than TLDs) TAR since, if nothing else, I suspect caching server implementations probably aren't built to handle O(100000+) trust anchors. > If you use DLV, I've resolved (pun intended) to not comment on DLV. Regards, -drc
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: Another DNSSEC action: add your DS to DLV (Was: NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: Another DNSSEC action: add your DS to DLV (Was: NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]