IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 11 May 2021 01:15 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 DD4063A3233 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 May 2021 18:15:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 9ckpIqOOHQdV for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 May 2021 18:15:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (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 7CA403A322F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 May 2021 18:15:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FfKjf1YJWzKKn; Tue, 11 May 2021 03:15:34 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1620695734; bh=RdYjJk3FdUnq22ad23ixoVsu1JWMqLXB4deuTmEvnp8=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=ktsY4MAv3fJz9CqsRln2BvK0t+Honadkb6rRyM+2ds8Nz/mkNvkLAPX9+3+XWuq0E 7mgyMThoMypCFagBMtgMPtxYZO+qjfycTF5ZTpnvVaZhluB7JfdirakQAHO15Ju4hz GheIZR3zqrxpFkiPaMnRYHYJdKptlTAt/v8xbJjw=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m6H11PaNFe6A; Tue, 11 May 2021 03:15:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 11 May 2021 03:15:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 266035747C; Mon, 10 May 2021 21:15:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 237185747B; Mon, 10 May 2021 21:15:31 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 21:15:31 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl>
cc: DNSOP Working Group <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <bfaa3ab3-3d96-dcec-a175-5803de03d852@NLnetLabs.nl>
Message-ID: <6aa7d3aa-8ba6-90df-ebf-29eae3e0e26@nohats.ca>
References: <bfaa3ab3-3d96-dcec-a175-5803de03d852@NLnetLabs.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/e8YkLRlDNv_ym4axqL1GSGmLB7M>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Call for Adoption: draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance
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: Tue, 11 May 2021 01:15:43 -0000

On Mon, 10 May 2021, Benno Overeinder wrote:

> Now we will start a period of two weeks for the call for adoption of 
> draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance on the mailing list.

> The draft is available here: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardaker-dnsop-nsec3-guidance/.

> Please review this draft to see if you think it is suitable for adoption by 
> DNSOP, and comments to the list, clearly stating your view.

Please adopt. Willing to review and contribute text.

I think what is missing is a discussion of online signing with nsec3
white lies - it does make it harder to brute force since you can't
grab the full chain of hashed names.

Paul

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status