Re:DNSSEC failures are how you get people to disable DNSSEC
by silisili on Thursday June 01, 2023 @03:20AM
(#36148395)
Totally. DNS was always an IETF RFC bound thing. Recently, big players just kinda started making their own decisions.
I'm not sure which is better. Having big companies control the internet is definitely bad, but the pedantry and bikeshedding the IETF offers can be equally bad.
I'd probably rather see the two cooperate/converge, but that's a pipe dream.
Re:DNSSEC failures are how you get people to disable DNSSEC
by teddyh on Thursday June 01, 2023 @05:54AM
(#36149161)
This sounds exactly like the age-old debates bemoaning the bureaucracy of government versus the exploitation of industry. People knowing the pain of one always look hopefully at the other.
Re:DNSSEC failures are how you get people to disable DNSSEC
by abwizz on Thursday June 01, 2023 @04:02AM
(#36148606)
> I feel like it'd take as little as a half-percent of the people writing new HTTP tooling to noticeable improve the DNS ecosystem as a whole.
you mean like the ppl that made it more centralized and failure prone?
Re:DNSSEC failures are how you get people to disable DNSSEC
by donttellmypeers on Thursday June 01, 2023 @06:00AM
(#36149194)
Is that a dig at the DoH crowd?
My comment wasn't suggesting a HTTP background is necessary for someone to help move the DNS ecosystem forward.
DNSSEC's lack of maturity is a symptom of DNS itself not having a healthy ecosystem. I feel like it'd take as little as a half-percent of the people writing new HTTP tooling to noticeable improve the DNS ecosystem as a whole.