IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] DNSSEC as a Best Current Practice

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Thu, 07 April 2022 15:01 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
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 4D4313A0859 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 08:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 oJBAf-lB2U9m for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 08:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 514103A094C for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 08:01:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 52046 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2022 14:56:58 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 7 Apr 2022 14:56:58 -0000
Message-ID: <00501a4b-0e47-e25e-2791-d0b80a416793@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2022 00:01:02 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <57f1c37b-497c-e1a0-329c-4b9c8b7e197b@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <A9F689C9-4ABF-4947-AA6B-56E2F0C17D13@nohats.ca> <9732682e-78e7-f6bf-84fc-685de22d5e12@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <350d8ab8-0477-b656-8b08-56f7561a7fda@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <860d0d0-281e-b8c9-4169-5998a95a581f@nohats.ca>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <860d0d0-281e-b8c9-4169-5998a95a581f@nohats.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/EnIv1NxOj3GXNM0sgjvvcpteb9s>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSSEC as a Best Current Practice
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 07 Apr 2022 15:01:21 -0000

Paul Wouters wrote:

>> Are there anyone who still think DNSSEC were cryptographically secure
>> or had protected TLDs more securely than diginotar?
> 
> Yes, everyone but you who participated in this thread.

That's simply wrong.

Are there anyone who still think, with reasons, DNSSEC were
cryptographically secure or had protected TLDs more securely
than diginotar?

						Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email