Re: [DNSOP] [dnsext] Re: Computerworld apparently has changed DNS protocol

[David Conrad <[e-mail]>]

Matthew,

On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:45 PM, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:04 PM, David Conrad <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> On Nov 4, 2009, at 11:41 AM, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:26 AM,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>       The current deployment plan is to stage things to push out large responses
>>>>       early - prior to having any actual DNSSEC usable data ... ostensibly to
>>>>       flush out DNSmtu problems.
>>> 
>>> Is this plan to push out large responses indiscriminately, or only in
>>> response to queries with DO=1?
>> 
>> We're not planning on breaking the DNS protocol.  DNSSEC responses will only be provided if DO=1 (currently about 70% of the queries hitting the root have DO=1).
> 
> I'd appreciate if someone could clarify what the "large responses"
> that will preexist "actual DNSSEC usable data" that Bill Manning is
> referring to are.

They are signed responses, but signed with a 'deliberately unvalidatable root key'.

> It's unclear to me whether it's still technically
> DNSSEC data and hence would require a client to send DO=1,

Yes, it is DNSSEC data and will only be returned if DO=1.  Clients that do not set DO=1 will not receive the DNSSEC responses.

> or if it
> will be something like large additional section TXT records or just
> trailing bytes.

No.

Regards,
-drc