Design by committee generally leads to poor results. A much better approach is the competition method, where e.g. the public is asked for proposals to secure D

Design by committee generally leads to poor results. A much better approach is the competition method, where e.g. the public is asked for proposals to secure DNS as in the AES, eSTREAM, PHC, and CAESAR competitions. DNSSEC was not "design by committee" -- it was "design by multiple committees, all stuck in the 1990s." And this is what we get. Personally I say: DNSCurve > DNS > DNSSEC. I would support a DNS security competition, even if DNSCurve (which I've deployed) were not selected. DNSSEC wouldn't stand a chance in a public competition.