Re: [DNSOP] Should root-servers.net be signed

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Mon, 08 March 2010 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5BA3A69AE for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 07:37:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.955
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.955 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.091, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d29iMGi5sQiR for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 07:37:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41133A68E7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 07:37:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.158] (75-101-30-90.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [75.101.30.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o28FTT8H090599 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 08:29:30 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240805c7bac7695f8c@[10.20.30.158]>
In-Reply-To: <0E169711-92DC-4AEA-AA81-718F298D1645@hopcount.ca>
References: <2AA0F45200E147D1ADC86A4B373C3D46@localhost> <0E169711-92DC-4AEA-AA81-718F298D1645@hopcount.ca>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:29:27 -0800
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>, George Barwood <george.barwood@blueyonder.co.uk>
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Should root-servers.net be signed
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:37:07 -0000

At 9:38 AM -0500 3/8/10, Joe Abley wrote:
>I also find Jim's point regarding NET rather compelling. If the NET zone is not signed, then validating responses from a signed ROOT-SERVERS.NET zone would require yet another trust anchor to be manually-configured.

...and to manually be removed in the future when the keys for root-servers.net are rolled. For bonus points, imagine the consequences of that happening after .net is signed.

This list is DNSOP, not DNSEXT: we are tasked with thinking about the operational aspects of both doing and undoing a particular action, and the effects on the DNS for when that doing and undoing happens incorrectly.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium