Re: [DNSOP] Updated KSK Sentinel document

Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz> Wed, 21 February 2018 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <vladimir.cunat@nic.cz>
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 805EF12D86F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 08:14:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.989
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nic.cz
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 j0K5Gu1ukiSu for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 08:14:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 587B912E88D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 08:14:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:1488:fffe:6:14a0:71ff:fe7e:4550] (unknown [IPv6:2001:1488:fffe:6:14a0:71ff:fe7e:4550]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8452762609 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 17:14:00 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1519229640; bh=E+DiVXJjNWsJ2ZNSz9okQ6mtpbW423LGdJO9PrsVpog=; h=From:Date; b=uiEQEq2x7eRVKbZRax/8czt6gc0DrhrXmOzFc+uNQX5VyGQVBa+9N0aVNA3AGTy/H LYkPt26NwR/TarNZOcZsowaAq8ja7wlJJH9p+MqG+099VsxRNVXLSBNmi1B+aKDtUQ C0qdWqqwetDk/aNUuvv21IgS2cPVaEsBO4M8anTk=
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <CAHw9_iJ5Dr0sHw3EkWyHeAVDDb3k=8C6XOfrA02-_bQzd4n2Sg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJE_bqeTyiotHcnuQ69=dF+MWXwztNNqamRf5BCOj04hhVGrgA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_i+G4V85oH96H9DgZR+mh9vnNA464wUezpyaUmCTqtHdqA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltw61yIMSMdW7DoXQ=?= <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>
Message-ID: <dc29e835-9128-e430-0322-48bda809bed4@nic.cz>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 17:14:00 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i+G4V85oH96H9DgZR+mh9vnNA464wUezpyaUmCTqtHdqA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/BfYRpegt-kfNUSzgtSqnA8LT7QY>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Updated KSK Sentinel document
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: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 16:14:05 -0000

On 02/21/2018 02:53 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Hmmm... Good point. I personally actually preferred having these as
> "decimal" keys.
> RFC1034, Sec 5.3: The DS RR Presentation Format sayeth:
>    " The Key Tag field MUST be represented as an unsigned decimal
> integer.", things like dig +multiline DNSKEY . shows it as decimal,
> etc.

Yes, using the (unpadded) presentation format would certainly feel more
natural to me (rfc4034), as that seems the generally preferred format. 
I may have missed some arguments in favor of the current style.

--Vladimir  @  cz.nic