Why is this supposed to be interesting? You could run defaultless BGP4 on your Linux box if you wanted to badly enough. The question is "what end-user operating system already does this?".
I think some people assumed you were being imprecise in wording your question, because when there's a comment talking about what OSes don't do but should do, "What OS is able to do this?" makes more sense than "What OS already does this by default?".
So "Why is this supposed to be interesting?" is a bit rude for someone that was trying to answer a reasonable interpretation of your question.
You might be right. I really am frustrated by the mindset that says that because a Linux system administrator could get some feature to work, that means it's available to mainstream users; that logic really does suggest that you can do virtually anything on a desktop computer, which is technically correct but kind of negates the whole premise of the question.
But if I came off as personally rude, I apologize and will try harder not to do that.
Everyone conveniently forgets that the dropbox comment had some very legitimate points, and the part that gets quoted and mocked was specifically about the benefit to linux users.
That comment there? Never seen it quoted, always in context.
It’s being brought up because it’s very a propos. Someone, somewhere said x problem needs a better solution, and someone else replied that it can be done on one specific Linux distro with a specific kernel version or configuration.
> Someone, somewhere said x problem needs a better solution, and someone else replied that it can be done on one specific Linux distro with a specific kernel version or configuration.
Hang on, what is 'it' in this sentence?
Because the dropbox comment was skeptical of the need for a "better solution". In this interpretation, 'it' is an explanation of how to solve the problem the old-fashioned way.
But the comment we're replying to agrees that we need the "better solution" of DNSSEC, and is suggesting a way to deploy the "better solution". In this interpretation, 'it' is the "better solution".
Those two ways of interpreting 'it' are opposites. The two comments are doing very different things.
So "Why is this supposed to be interesting?" is a bit rude for someone that was trying to answer a reasonable interpretation of your question.