Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-pwouters-powerbind-00.txt (fwd)

Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu> Mon, 19 March 2018 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <rharolde@umich.edu>
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 09B6212D873 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umich.edu
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 WbPDnpAmGNnb for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C136D12D7FC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id x205-v6so26896351lfa.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umich.edu; s=google-2016-06-03; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7xLKglIWfT48bq5isjfukcDNWlznfudrq7/1ViEwXFk=; b=n9LzDbb/xofwVkhFUUJrDTfK3WNSciM/AM4SJnfjwQg+U2gc0y4To/eVu8cvnDXi58 NDL+4hw3dzboTvPoFUFdOew6WSmGRpMNZShpJeoEsiEN8xnGy1dlsxBBToIqIYv8XDHg BCuoBymUULG1gadyAbsxv41UgH1mAlYJ6WBWU0ijGFoZ+MFAqc55OERyZL+lAPjyDTU6 yvRsgEo3HDOhCdAwI4ZoMTNUJoHV4tE4ooMz263+sNAO5jID3XEZUZ3gc+4aFNDd8+I7 XnE5wBd3EDfEZXyTwJj7UtXoyY7X+qiGSS9SmY2laycWJLEDFLOgam2WSq9NYObDtBsL 5ZUQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7xLKglIWfT48bq5isjfukcDNWlznfudrq7/1ViEwXFk=; b=AmVno1wT2+QgoQm3WpPnKrM6C38A1bV3U52kNHm9zM50RWOFdFLIa1Ayeb2jO8xjQx MJB5uxxY7uh3cAxXKVBAvqbQpMaKgf0rALeztJ4h0riswHfE+PAaUOb5m06f4xKeacUf /4Ba/ybboen0cvHjdjn+IlXtRyvXtBWZa3qi3Ra0YolPTPCH1Hl5DvcePYweoZaGd3ad mJzUGX9Cav8xTXzylwm6cx2kjOFMGw/iLp615rQ6aBNOZr5JwCC3FMMqi4yhr3F+rjKf D7f4wFuMhBhJuj0K4kSc0P8NNEkxjPkuk23kprP/YwVdmEmVZfLnZinWl9sftn3SLCLy /NZw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HXJ9HCdw18+I8rIiQNldNxRopaHulG27bbe8HjG/SuRjl/aPsr cGYoYeP33gxDMcNck3kg/KYCKcVPxcI5bAOAPaBVCRl/9uk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtgobHtsq61snjaKGlAnKNADIwxx1CECrOYY6Yv9bc1u2CpYXVtqA2LiQDO9ZwFW6Bf9/G62IQnYfPtDy2jkxw=
X-Received: by 10.46.23.70 with SMTP id l67mr8424690lje.132.1521483158948; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.47.14 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:12:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180319163434.GA25738@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1803190813150.31565@bofh.nohats.ca> <20180319163434.GA25738@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
From: Bob Harold <rharolde@umich.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:12:38 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+nkc8CWtXOiXCVQf4iyJwBS1K4seLxsJmtZyRyz7yuCn+u8hQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, Wes Hardaker <wes@hardakers.net>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Trans <trans@ietf.org>, Liang Xia <frank.xialiang@huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114af28a38a42a0567c7e7f4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ebFXymvpjDaYTasfcGNDzFciBO8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-pwouters-powerbind-00.txt (fwd)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 18:12:44 -0000

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>;
wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 08:22:03AM -0400,
>  Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>; wrote
>  a message of 57 lines which said:
>
> > We have just submitted a draft aimed at increasing the security of
> > the DNSSEC with respect to the power that parental zones have over
> > their children.
>
> I'm opposed to this idea.
>
> > While the root and TLD zones are asumed to be almost exclusively
> > delegation-only zones,
>
> This is unrelated. You mix two different things, the administrative
> issue and the technical one (every subdomain in its own zone). gouv.fr
> is administratively a delegation from .fr but is in the same zone.
>
> > the root zone operator (or any level higher in the hierarchy than
> > the target victim) could briefly remove the NS and DS records, and
> > create a "legitimate" DNS entry for "www.example.org"
>
>

If the parent simply pointed the NS and DS records to a different version
of the zone, that would accomplish the same effect, even with a
'delegation-only'
flag, so the 'delegation-only' flag really does not solve the problem.

-- 
Bob Harold





> That's the DNS. It is a tree. Protecting childs against the parent is
> a non-goal, or otherwise we should move to some alternative to DNS
> (Namecoin is cool).
>
> > The aim here is to counter the argument that the root key and TLD
> > keys are all powerful and under government control, and can therefor
> > never be trusted.
>
> I've read the draft and still can understand nothing in this sentence.
>
> > 2) Allow the creation of DNSSEC transparency logs
>
> May be mentioning draft-zhang-trans-ct-dnssec would be nice?
>
> >  The DELEGATION_ONLY flag has a strong overlap in functionality with
> >  the Public Suffix List as both signal a formal split of authority
> >  between parent and child.
>
> May be mentioning the defunct DBOUND working group would be a good
> idea?
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>