Re: [DNSOP] draft-fujiwara-dnsop-delegation-information-signer

[Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>]

> On 5 Nov 2020, at 15:49, [e-mail] wrote:
> 
>> From: Mark Andrews <[e-mail]>
>> One problem with DiS is that assumes that address records in the additional
>> section *always* come from the delegating zone (see how the hash is created).
>> This is not how DNS works.  Address records can, correctly, come from other
>> sources, even when the name is *below* the zone cut.
>> 
>> Take a server that serves example.net and sub.child.example.net.  That A record
>> comes from sub.child.example.net not example.net when the name of the server is
>> a.sub.example.net.
>> 
>> 	child.example.net NS a.sub.example.net
>> 	a.sub.example.net A 1.2.3.4
>> 
>> Mark

I ment
	child.example.net NS a.sub.child.example.net
	a.sub.child.example.net A 1.2.3.4

(which should have been obvious from the paragraph above)

> 
> "a.sub.example.net" is not a "in-domain" glue. (it is "sibling" glue).
> Then, DiS RR for child.example.net will be generated
> from "child.example.net NS a.sub.example.net".
> 
> Authoritative server of "child.example.net" responds
>  child.example.net NS a.sub.example.net in authority section
>  with/without a.sub.example.net A 1.2.3.4 as a glue in additional section.
> 
> Sibling glue "a.sub.example.net A 1.2.3.4" is not a target of DiS RR
> for "child.example.net NS".
> Validator can validate "child.example.net NS a.sub.example.net".
> 
> Validating resolver can accept the sibling glue "a.sub.example.net A 1.2.3.4".
> Or,
> validating resolver may reject the sibling glue "a.sub.example.net A 1.2.3.4",
> and treat it similar to out-of-bailing domain name,
> then, resolve "a.sub.example.net" A/AAAA from root (or child.exapmle.net).
> 
> Then I think the idea works.
> 
> --
> Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <[e-mail]>
> 
>>> On 4 Nov 2020, at 15:31, [e-mail] wrote:
>>> 
>>> I submitted draft-fujiwara-dnsop-delegation-information-signer-00.
>>> 
>>> Name:		draft-fujiwara-dnsop-delegation-information-signer
>>> Revision:	00
>>> Title:		Delegation Information (Referrals) Signer for DNSSEC
>>> Document date:	2020-11-03
>>> Group:		Individual Submission
>>> Pages:		6
>>> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-fujiwara-dnsop-delegation-information-signer-00.txt
>>> 
>>> DNSSEC does not have a function to validate delegation information.
>>> I think it is a large missing peace of DNSSEC.
>>> 
>>> I have a question why we did not include signature validation function
>>> to delegation information ?
>>> 
>>> Probably, because it is non-authoritative information.
>>> Or, because it was difficult to define the necessary and sufficient
>>> delegation information.
>>> 
>>> It is now widely agreed (although not explicitly documented) that the
>>> delegation information is the information used for name resolution and
>>> does not result in name resolution.
>>> 
>>> We have a word "in-domain" glue which is the necessary and sufficient glue.
>>> 
>>> And the idea may offer the signature for root priming data.
>>> 
>>> If someone interested the document, I would like time slot at dnsop WG
>>> meeting.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <[e-mail]>
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DNSOP mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>> 
>> -- 
>> Mark Andrews, ISC
>> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
>> PHONE: [phone]              INTERNET: [e-mail]
>> 
>> 

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: [phone]              INTERNET: [e-mail]