Re: [DNSOP] [dnsext] Why ZSK rollover is a Bad Idea (tm)

[Olaf Kolkman <[e-mail]>]

On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:

>>
>> From this perspective we might roll a ZSK more frequently than a  
>> KSK because
>> the ZSK needs to be stored on-line to facilitate re-signing when  
>> the zone
>> changes. With the KSK we have the option of keeping it off-line, and
>> arguably the risk of compromise is consequently lower. Regular  
>> testing of
>> the machinery is still important, however.
>
> Again, this seems like an argument for the ZSK/KSK split, which I'm  
> not really
> arguing against (I haven't developed an opinion). My argument is  
> purely
> against generating a new ZSK every time you sign it with the KSK. I  
> don't
> think that provides much security benefit and certainly does have  
> plenty of
> room for error.


Aha, I agree, FWIW there is no such requirement/suggestion in 4641 or  
4641 bis.

--Olaf


________________________________________________________

Olaf M. Kolkman                        NLnet Labs
                                        Science Park 140,
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/               1098 XG Amsterdam