ISC DLV

David Conrad drc at virtualized.org
Sun Apr 5 11:19:35 CDT 2009


On Apr 5, 2009, at 12:09 AM, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 07:37:15PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
>>
>> The fault has been rectified.  We are still looking into the
>> underlying cause and what procedural changes need to be made to
>> prevent a repeat occurance.
>>
>> Mark Andrews, ISC
>
> 	could ISC be a bit more open and transparent on what the
> 	underlying cause was, the path/steps between cause and effect,
> 	and the range of options/choices for mitigation and why the
> 	one chosen (presuming it was a procedural issue) was/is the
> 	best choice.

You should definitely demand your money back. Given the root servers  
don't provide this level of accountability, not sure why you think ISC  
should.

Stuff happens.  If you've chosen to share fate with ISC for name  
resolution via DLV, then you should accept that it does and anticipate  
these sorts of outages.  I'm sure the folks at ISC will attempt to  
minimize reoccurrence.

Regards,
-drc





More information about the NANOG mailing list