On Oct 1, 2025, at 07:29, Ondřej Surý <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 9. 7. 2025, at 16:43, John R Levine <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 9 Jul 2025, Petr Špaček wrote: >>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1snTpkDcRmJN8bbGx9XrOt5taUdS1xSElMB1Ok8s7Kko >>> >>> I take that as an argument to forbid it! >>> >>> 107 sounds like perfectly tractable number to fix. The two flag days had >>> waaaay wider reach, for example, and way more domains got fixed. >> >> I still don't see the point. >> >> That was a snapshot from a year ago. If I did it again, the list would be >> different. We wouldn't have just to fix the collisions in those 107 domains, > >> we'd have to upgrade *everyone's* software to prevent them in the future. > > Yes, great. That's an excellent operational advice to not run old crap.
Uhmmmm ? The world isn’t that black and white. Additionally, flag days are bad as it turns production quality and certified solutions into “old crap” on a single unfortunate day in the future these deployments have no reason to monitor or track now. > >> Getting rid of all of the potential collisions would be a great deal of work. > > I disagree. It is not a great deal of work. It is a part of normal > operational practice. > Bugs in software gets fixed, operators upgrade the software. It is as no one remembered these discussions we had a number of times now. Environments with KSK and ZSK split might find it hard to guarantee this - even if they could, it inserts a human component in a protocol flow where no human is needed now. And the reason for doing so have not convinced many people on this list. There is no consensus and it is time to drop this idea. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
