IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Why new code/old keys? Re: [Ext] Re: sentinel and timing?

Mukund Sivaraman <muks@isc.org> Thu, 08 February 2018 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <muks@isc.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEAAA1242F7 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 10:17:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id waJaE1nunc-f for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 10:17:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.banu.com (mail.banu.com [46.4.129.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A9B12706D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 10:17:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jurassic (unknown [182.156.96.122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.banu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29C4932C0A82; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:17:36 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 23:47:34 +0530
From: Mukund Sivaraman <muks@isc.org>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
Cc: Matt Larson <matt@kahlerlarson.org>, Ed Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>, dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Message-ID: <20180208181734.GA29920@jurassic>
References: <564E7616-6B47-48E2-B3DC-68A22032F441@icann.org> <20180208.152419.74654265.sthaug@nethelp.no> <A03DAC63-E005-4811-B706-B0284273DE6B@hopcount.ca> <32CB34DD-D682-42D7-B869-5A03057FCCC1@kahlerlarson.org> <5A7C89B6.2000907@redbarn.org> <C4EABC66-B9EB-427E-8DFD-FBD3B82D8343@kahlerlarson.org> <5A7C918A.10101@redbarn.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5A7C918A.10101@redbarn.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/-P3YRggExDuT0RCnBM0ZelD-yPs>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Why new code/old keys? Re: [Ext] Re: sentinel and timing?
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 18:17:43 -0000

On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 10:06:02AM -0800, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > At the very least, a "trusted-keys for the root KSK considered
> > harmful" syslog message would be a hopefully easy and
> > non-controversial first step in the right direction.
> 
> i think that's entirely reasonable, and based on BIND9's syslogging when its
> hints file is seen to be out of date (doesn't match priming), i think
> there's sufficient precedent. but i do think we ought to be realistic as to
> whether the 99%'ers will ever read their syslog files.

I would've sworn this was already done. It looks like it was discussed
on ticket #43670 and then the ticket was silently closed. Re-opening.

		Mukund

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email