We dont run rpz on the resolver nodes, hopefully when we clear the backlog of things we want to fix/tweak/finish we can get around to dropping some docs on the cool stuff we built/did, and why. #todolist
Those ads make me want a 10x real ultimate power ninja to silently enter their offices and dose every last executive and HR employee with a combination laxative-emetic, video record the aftermath, then silently slip away.
But I'm cheap too, so if that ninja could do it at 60% of the going rate for mass poisonings, that would be great. Their clan is also going to need 200 years of experience in undetectable infiltration, 300 years in poisons and venoms, and 500 years in absolute client confidentiality. Thanks.
I've seen one company asking for Ph.Ds in Math for a non-Math/Data/Science position. They said they put that on there because they had a bad experience in the past from someone who couldn't code but looked good on a resume. They wanted to pay $75-85k for that position. But then decided to take the interview anyway, so it clearly wasn't an actual requirement.
That's really the issue: job postings drive what developers "ought" to know because they should indicate some kind of business demand for individual skills. But there's no feedback to punish companies who scribble whatever they want on their job postings, so they continue to add new line items without verifying that what they're doing right now is working. It just leads to confusion and wasted time finding out what they actually want. If they can't find someone, they obviously go "Developer shortage! No one has the 50 skills w/ 5 years of experience on our job posting!"
Compound that with resume prose (pushed by people charging for resume review) that sometimes goes overboard in its effort to make something out of very little and we have a system where no actual communication takes place until you're in front of someone.
I've seen the same thing multiple times, especially with NodeJS all those jobs require 10 years of NodeJS experience, even though NodeJS is only like 8.5 years old at this time
It appears that the issue at first impacted all servers in the anycast pool however eventually it only impacted servers ns-a2 and ns-a4. Those servers started returning NXDOMAINs. I am wondering if this was related to the root server key change yesterday. .IO seems to struggle with basic DNS engineering. We are seeing stabilization except for minor issues still on one of the gTLD servers.
The root server key won't actually change until next month.
The DNSKEY responses from the root server was increased yesterday.
Speculation, but it could be they're running ancient versions of BIND that fail with the larger response size.
As per ICANN[0], the timeline is:
October 27, 2016: KSK rollover process begins as the new KSK is generated.
July 11, 2017: Publication of new KSK in DNS.
September 19, 2017: Size increase for DNSKEY response from root name servers.
October 11, 2017: New KSK begins to sign the root zone key set (the actual rollover event).
January 11, 2018: Revocation of old KSK.
March 22, 2018: Last day the old KSK appears in the root zone.
August 2018: Old key is deleted from equipment in both ICANN Key Management Facilities.
It appears that the issue at first impacted all servers in the anycast pool however eventually it only impacted servers ns-a2 and ns-a4. Those servers started returning NXDOMAINs. I am wondering if this was related to the root server key change yesterday. .IO seems to struggle with basic DNS engineering.
Whats the issue with that statement. It is early and I haven't had my coffee yet but I am a security researcher and while I have my questions about his past many of my counter parts in the UK have raised some very very valid questions about the legitimacy of the allegations against him. So unless I am missing a grammatical or syntactical error whats the issue with that statement?
