first of all DNS has stood up pretty fantastically to the massive increase of scope since its initial conception. So, congratulations and thanks to PVM and Paul

first of all DNS has stood up pretty fantastically to the massive increase of scope since its initial conception. So, congratulations and thanks to PVM and Paul Vixie and all the other countless people who contributed. So, you're right to point fingers at all the companies with multi-billion dollar caps built on top of BGP, and DNS, and all the clearly inadequate infrastructure. I think you're falling short by suggesting that companies should have technical specialists. Ok so we admit that DNS is inadequate for the task. People are dumping a whole lot of policy in there that doesn't make sense. DNS security seems to continue to have limited uptake. Despite any cast the DNS infrastructure is both vulnerable to attack and more importantly able to be used as a amplifier for other attacks. So sure, insufficient investment by either neutral research funders or commercial entities. But can you imagine what would happen if we tried to get together interested parties and develop a replacement? Even if the end product were technically flawless can you imagine the difficulties in spurring adoption? PVM wrote some RFCs and said 'what do you guys think', and the 50 people around the table said 'seems ok', and some people wrote some code, and everyone else who trusted them installed it because it was better than ftp-ing host.txt files and merging them by hand every month. can you imagine that happening today? I don't disagree with what you've said, and I'm fundamentally frustrated by this ossification myself. I can't see any answers.