At Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:49:22 +0000, Bill Manning wrote:
> Now that the DNSSECbis docs are locked, loaded, and the tubes flooded,

Only almost, and it might be nice to let the WG list quiet down a bit
so that folks could concentrate on the boring job of proofreading the
flipping -bis docs rather than jumping right into yet another high
volume debate, but I know that Bill is easily bored.

> perhaps its time to review one of the basic presumptions that drove the
> -bis set and seemed to cause any amount of angst in some operators.
> should the DNS and the data it holds be considered confidential?

I suspect that the trust model would prove sufficiently complex that
it would render the result, if usable at all, sufficiently different
from DNS as we know it that it would be easier just to start over.

I'm tempted to say, along with Rocket J. Squirrel, that "that trick
never works", but I could of course be wrong.

to unsubscribe send a message to with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.