FW: [Dnssec-deployment] 3 years on, 1/3 done?

["Chasen, Les" <les.chasen@neustar.biz>]

Hi all,

I am forwarding this email from a DNSSEC email list because of this quote
at the end of the email.

	"things that take a long time to mature seem to live longer"


I think this applies to XDI.  Read the whole note below.  It has a few
references that you may find interesting.

- Les



-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Lewis <ed.lewis@neustar.biz>
Date: Friday, July 19, 2013 8:29 AM
To: "dnssec-deployment@dnssec-deployment.org"
<dnssec-deployment@dnssec-deployment.org>
Cc: "Lewis, Ed" <Lewis@neustar.biz>
Subject: Re: [Dnssec-deployment] 3 years on, 1/3 done?

>
>On Jul 16, 2013, at 6:15, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
>> 
>> I hope you'll forgive my sarcasm.
>
>
>I've been staring at this in my in-box wondering if there's a worthwhile
>reply.
>
>The fact that 1/3rd of the TLDs are signed is not a statement that it is
>taking off, in fact, the number of signed TLDs has been fairly flat for
>many months.  In this calendar year very few TLDs have started signing, 3
>"ascii" ccTLDs and 2 "idn" ccTLDs.  I've noticed newly signed TLDs this
>year on Jan 22, Apr 2, 5, 21, and Jun 20.  (My dates are the day after
>the event, when my monitors "pick it up.")  That's not a fast rise, less
>than one a month!
>
>There's even been a "retreat" - on May 8 one ccTLD ceased signing. In the
>past there's a case of a ccTLD signing, stopping, then resuming.  Natural
>course of engineering.
>
>In just about all TLDs where DS records are present for more than even,
>maybe, 2% of the delegations, there is a financial incentive.  Not just
>the example you've cited, but in just about all of them.  Where there's
>no incentive, DNSSEC is present but scant.  (Lesson - economics trumps
>technology!)
>
>"So what?"
>
>DNSSEC can be described as using a tank to kill a fly.  Or it can be the
>foundation of a more secured Internet, an enabler of DANE.  Expectations
>of adoption rate are set by someone's interest in seeing DNSSEC or an
>alternative succeed or fail.  But expectations are just figments of the
>imagination.
>
>Looking at other cases of something being created and then dispersed,
>things that take a long time to mature seem to live longer.  Biologically
>this has been studied, organisms that mature quickly have shorter
>lifespans. As with any scientific study, it's best to read the reports
>and check out the caveats.  (See papers like this
>http://www.senescence.info/comparative_biology.html and
>http://www.jax.org/news/archives/2012/aging-pnas.html)
>
>Engineers like spectacular growth rates.  Nature does not.
>
>PS. The Internet is 40 years old and still is used by only 1/3rd of the
>world's population. ;)  Just had to add that "red herring."
>(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring)
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>-
>Edward Lewis      
>NeuStar                    You can leave a voice message at
>+1-571-434-5468
>
>There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses.
>