[dnsext] Deliberately bad DNSSEC for testing ?
"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 01 July 2013 02:13 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980E621F8F87 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.124
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.124 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DmiijeZZPl+O for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D2D21F8D10 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 29762 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2013 02:13:29 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2013 02:13:29 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=51d0e5c9.xn--3zv.k1306; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=QuvW7a37bikxqDH46dcRD9fmmKrh54RnCMRnXSBo1KI=; b=BBNXNbg1o89LdDJ/TjEp2lG0xGr80n0YEgJdsCpK/aueacEIz1jGD2WFMarxb671FUHr+B72QjO9M7tl7au0Xv/eWNDDsw1wAGGJj7EkwIdbXOX7cO8HO/l6KYcMv8dgKs51s7sOcDB626f1uAV7SbMeWJ76/MBXVhs+Vlnibx2y2tq7MaqHw98Vq8536MPEyetA2Ac/sdTb0Eii8Y3Aejoj5WqulOFueJz6qcjZkBSgqPyrHcrTbk+A961v9Iag
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=51d0e5c9.xn--3zv.k1306; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=QuvW7a37bikxqDH46dcRD9fmmKrh54RnCMRnXSBo1KI=; b=XSSToIMOqgNqqtnOL0YOyx/KHveqrkbCs7Zs5aVEY+XeshrTB4GPr/3Rr8578X0s5bU+TgcB41DnTzZarOjv78jV8ciwTXnANDlKmoLXocaE19azyfLjisZy5NXWR4916tFyFxirlyAowvllQDvMRs2y2ypWeE+chkWhQp7KPUL3dv0zMuriYWu1iZgmFdWuKFPM0X4f1wpII1QELDJerLuo2wkXS1nBTxVEKJdMhH6W1Io0PVH2P0ZvBlnChP4E
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 02:13:07 -0000
Message-ID: <20130701021307.72271.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Subject: [dnsext] Deliberately bad DNSSEC for testing ?
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 02:13:37 -0000
Does anyone publish DNS records with deliberately broken DNSSEC so we can test that our DNSSEC-aware clients don't resolve them?
- Re: [dnsext] Deliberately bad DNSSEC for testing ? Matthäus Wander
- Re: [dnsext] Deliberately bad DNSSEC for testing ? Richard Lamb
- [dnsext] Deliberately bad DNSSEC for testing ? John Levine