IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] DNSSEC as a Best Current Practice

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Tue, 22 March 2022 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
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 D0C1E3A0D23 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 qDzwIc6I6-Vc for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:05:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 064A53A0D02 for <DNSOP@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2022 02:05:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 65060 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2022 09:01:56 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 22 Mar 2022 09:01:56 -0000
Message-ID: <163bfd78-c21d-084c-9f6d-9d29b80bcbd1@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:05:43 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <DNSOP@ietf.org>
References: <7aaed092-8877-ec15-9b7b-5d488e383d04@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <7C43871E-60AF-485D-8AB3-65E72539F831@nohats.ca> <59fdc791-4482-141b-03b4-bc27e8824f31@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <1cd37a4-2f80-5a8c-f377-d224a363d76@nohats.ca> <6d46abd6-60ca-d896-6408-fe83a83895cf@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <CAH1iCir6OdMWZLFnP_=me+PFhYL+FxTjhEjKFO32+g61JgjnNg@mail.gmail.com> <4a33bbc9-b085-e8bc-4183-f55933e57786@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <87pmme8j36.fsf@miraculix.mork.no>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <87pmme8j36.fsf@miraculix.mork.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/krvqp0aFqblQQ2BodF22yeGws18>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSSEC as a Best Current Practice
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, 22 Mar 2022 09:06:06 -0000

Bjorn Mork wrote:

>> Plain DNS with long enough message ID is secure enough.
> 
> Hello!
> 
> Can you please point me to the set of RFCs (or draft) which describes
> this "secure enough" alternative to DNSSEC?

As I wrote "rely on DNS cookie or something like that",
an example is in rfc7873.

						Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email