Re: [DNSOP] Multi Provider DNSSEC Models

Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl> Thu, 22 March 2018 14:04 UTC

Return-Path: <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>
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 17E6712D87E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:04:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 jqmVDdIgnbon for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:04:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com (aserp2130.oracle.com [141.146.126.79]) (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 3F7F612D88D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w2MDttZQ083376 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:04:43 GMT
Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2gvdt8r1mu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:04:43 +0000
Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w2ME4h39010173 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:04:43 GMT
Received: from abhmp0012.oracle.com (abhmp0012.oracle.com [141.146.116.18]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w2ME4h2U026130 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:04:43 GMT
Received: from [31.133.136.99] (/31.133.136.99) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:04:42 -0700
To: dnsop@ietf.org
References: <CAHPuVdVi5C3nyVuG2aiLefN7eFPOx+GnOCxU40iio_Gn0oQ8qA@mail.gmail.com> <DFCE50F5-2385-4512-BF9F-1266C0DA4D6E@dotat.at> <CAHPuVdXy+oYgQEUoHoxN7W1BnuCoa+opHbQ9tbLZX2xDj2xoZg@mail.gmail.com> <9724C1F6-C470-4B4F-AFB3-2085A1B47B26@ogud.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1803221242040.2781@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
From: Matthijs Mekking <matthijs@pletterpet.nl>
Message-ID: <a653217e-8ddf-1cf5-ed19-932400825188@pletterpet.nl>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:04:40 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1803221242040.2781@grey.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=8839 signatures=668695
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=1 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1803200127
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/pnWdaWr7I84NpJnG6n8sowDXFlk>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Multi Provider DNSSEC Models
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: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 14:04:59 -0000

I agree, model 1 and model 2 seems doable. Note that RFC 6781 has some 
text for model 2 on rollover when changing DNS operators.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6781#section-4.3.5

Matthijs

On 22-03-18 13:50, Tony Finch wrote:
> Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>; wrote:
>>
>> I think only Model #1 makes sense, i.e Zone apex DNSKEY/CDNSKEY/CDS
>> RRset's are signed by zone publisher but rest signed by operator on the
>> fly.
> 
>>From the provider point of view, I think there are a couple of models:
> 
> (a) provider has KSK and ZSK; zone owner needs to be able to import other
> provider public keys into this provider's DNSKEY RRset, and export signed
> DNSKEY RRset.
> 
> (b) provider only has ZSK; zone owner needs to be able to export public
> keys, and import signed DNSKEY RRsets.
> 
> Given this, I think a zone owner can implement either model 1 or
> model 2 from the draft. Model 3 requires sharing private keys.
> 
> Tony.
>