On 7/21/2010 8:07 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
todd glassey wrote:
On 7/21/2010 1:02 PM, Dan Schutzer wrote:
Can you briefly explain the relationship of Red Light Camera's to
DNSSEC?
What that means is any and all DNSSEC records operated out of a Root or
lower level system in the state of California who would operate under
these rules will need to meet the "legal definitions of trustworthy"
which are much different that those here I am betting.
DNSSEC ist trust-free.
As I previously said in this forum(*)
Anyone who thinks that information in the DNS could be trusted
is either using a funny definition of trust or has no clue how
DNS is actually used and what kind of data it contains (and
how that data is created and maintained).
Any discussion about new legal liabilities for information conveyed
by DNSSEC will likely impede the further adoption of DNSSEC.
-Martin
(*)
https://www.ietf.org/ibin/c5i?mid=6&rid=49&gid=0&k1=933&k2=50326&tid=1279767429
Martin - since SAP's business is legally enforceable commerce are you
saying that there is no legal requirement for DNSSEC to return provable
content and if so where is the liability for it?
Todd Glassey
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf