IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Priming query transport selection

"George Barwood" <george.barwood@blueyonder.co.uk> Fri, 15 January 2010 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <george.barwood@blueyonder.co.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B8A3A6B1A for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:42:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.454
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_EQ_BLUEYON=1.4, MIME_BASE64_BLANKS=0.041, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QH1jtYDt-Xk0 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:42:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk (smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk [195.188.213.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E00B3A6B16 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:42:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.23.170.146] (helo=anti-virus03-09) by smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1NVpFN-00084E-Dc; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:42:05 +0000
Received: from [82.46.70.191] (helo=GeorgeLaptop) by asmtp-out1.blueyonder.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1NVpFM-0007pU-Su; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:42:04 +0000
Message-ID: <C70EBA7D41694531819FB0923455C684@localhost>
From: George Barwood <george.barwood@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: dnsop@ietf.org, Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
References: <201001131823.o0DINxYv068180@stora.ogud.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:42:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Priming query transport selection
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:42:12 -0000

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Olafur Gudmundsson" <ogud@ogud.com>
To: <dnsop@ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 6:19 PM
Subject: [DNSOP] Priming query transport selection


> 26 signed glue records will require about 5K answer if each RRSet is
> signed by a single 1024 bit RSA key.
> This will never fit into an ENDS0 answer as number of implementations
> have 4096 byte hard limit on answer size.
> As of today all the root servers instances that my host reached answered a TCP
> query.

Why would glue records be signed? That's not normal in DNSSEC, AFAIK.
Querying the IANA testbed

dig ns . @ns.iana.org. +dnssec

signs only the NS RRset, which seems reasonable.
Is the testbed not representative in some way?

[ Worried I'm saying something stupid - haven't thought about DNSSEC recently ]
George

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email