Re: [DNSOP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC8078 (5049)

Hi,

On 24-06-17 17:45, Ondřej Caletka wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Dne 24.6.2017 v 15:25 Dick Franks napsal(a):
>> I beg to disagree.
>>
>> In each case,
>>
>>        CDS 0 0 0 0
>>
>>        CDNSKEY 0 3 0 0
>>
>> the final "0" is a conventional token representing a zero-length key
>> field. In neither case is it an attempt to specify a single octet key value.
> 
> I believe this has been discussed between 04 and 06 versions of the
> draft in this thread:
> 
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/PsRIQOtd1bxFSEEm9lfv0WaHKeE >
> The result that made it to the RFC is that there should be indeed one
> byte with value of 00 in the Digest/Public key field instead of no data
> at all.

To be precise: We actually agreed that there should be *one field with 
the value of 0* instead of no data at all.

> This avoids the need of defining new format and updating all the
> deployed software. It's not only about parsers of the wire format but
> also about zone file parsers, that would need an update as the single
> zero is not conformant with currently defined presentation format of
> CDS/CDNSKEY RRs.

I raised the specific issue because the to be RFC 8078 was going to 
change the CDS and CDNSKEY RDATA format from a fixed length RDATA to a 
variable length: In case of the DELETE operation, the Digest in 
presentation format was omitted.

While I agree with Paul in that thread that we should use all zeros for 
the DELETE operation, I believe it was an oversight that the proper 
encodings (hexadecimal, base64) should be used.

So to me this errata is valid.

Best regards,
   Matthijs

> I believe changing RRdata format just for this one purpose would add an
> unnecessary complexity.
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> Ondřej Caletka
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 