IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] Re: New Version Notification for draft-yorgos-dnsop-dry-run-dnssec-02.txt

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Thu, 18 July 2024 08:32 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
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 C983AC14F6F2 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 01:32:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b="eOmLa35/"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isc.org header.b="C6CPeHeM"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mlzkoQwPcw5d for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 01:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [149.20.2.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA3D6C14F6BB for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 01:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (zimbrang.isc.org [149.20.2.31]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E5DB3AB276; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:32:23 +0000 (UTC)
ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 mx.pao1.isc.org 0E5DB3AB276
Authentication-Results: mx.pao1.isc.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=149.20.2.31
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1721291543; cv=none; b=Ukzp7knoe0ppPS510yF+CTfCer1tu94VhT4CLMGv6jvBhXljRU7yWw/s1mfZQbI9ixtrJo6nXv+P1S4NvRNl9ILZFnD7Ul71aykZNkNyMlUUysIpqH3SQ7Eu6a5HgIgmsIrLn7/nthUIM4wQFU7YJCaJ+38FCEOFu5+gZlEpty4=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1721291543; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=0cfz0UoGJy8t4NlTain+r9mxJhoCgcdP0I01t7joicw=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:From:Mime-Version:Subject:Date: Message-Id:To; b=kFTWyuQcryPRbCJt89fwbl/mCOgVr/Be7m6IsmZHftdBnTKBnow1K12mBOhjuNdBrub5WV6p4WRSFBnQGw7l+zum1BTuDt3HZN0frQuEgNeXyRMLKr5auwhK5VgHqvaymyJS4vJLkcU/DT1wewN+aUHrZ8JvwQoHRLE5W7u+irM=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.pao1.isc.org
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mx.pao1.isc.org 0E5DB3AB276
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=isc.org; s=ostpay; t=1721291543; bh=OnPvzayeGNV+QnZLvYAP1o5oVDvGqk4CvmUmPfWcuJM=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:Cc:In-Reply-To:To; b=eOmLa35/PaGukAjx1SVSfqIDAA04TxCsJVtbI1CkZ/hxyQGWNJfLbxWRGPkXmSh++ TktOR0G/gZuCnKQpNst1JeQlRy3kqVfanDc7JiaQdYDLkt2H9I/V6AZF7q7+b92G3F kpBAzOY1ow7BD2I3yMrNhXTF/EtwWYmcu6HJekG8=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09381BCD48F; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:32:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB80BBCD493; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:32:22 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 zimbrang.isc.org DB80BBCD493
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isc.org; s=05DFB016-56A2-11EB-AEC0-15368D323330; t=1721291542; bh=0cfz0UoGJy8t4NlTain+r9mxJhoCgcdP0I01t7joicw=; h=From:Mime-Version:Date:Message-Id:To; b=C6CPeHeMLBcunTZdHva4fMLi6sveaANsBypwfYqGNgRyGVuzMKw52W14oMTkZChBA HbYTod4uN+/I/qIebGCoZUW6qoHceVirN0wMhobN9/vZC8wu9+GgH9kmjXeAr362nu /2Xb/M6YXqjszMdAkZ9fIeIKa14bXwCigftWeqjw=
Received: from zimbrang.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbrang.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10026) with ESMTP id wLKxk5E4Gpa8; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:32:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [120.17.122.195]) by zimbrang.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F5C7BCD48F; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:32:22 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 18:27:30 +1000
Message-Id: <8ECF9259-8B1A-43AC-917B-8DD6A1183C27@isc.org>
References: <d48d8d3c-ee46-4bde-8337-7c6f91d73a89@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <d48d8d3c-ee46-4bde-8337-7c6f91d73a89@nic.cz>
To: "libor.peltan" <libor.peltan@nic.cz>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (21F90)
Message-ID-Hash: KJP6L2WTHOE5ESEI25BRCC2H5HBTB5LA
X-Message-ID-Hash: KJP6L2WTHOE5ESEI25BRCC2H5HBTB5LA
X-MailFrom: marka@isc.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Yorgos Thessalonikefs <yorgos@nlnetlabs.nl>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: New Version Notification for draft-yorgos-dnsop-dry-run-dnssec-02.txt
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/vxDA6nxU9LobRmT73DEnwwIMlx4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>

It would look like a regular DS. The only difference would be that the first byte of the digest would contain the sub type.   This is just internal structure of the digest. 
-- 
Mark Andrews

> On 18 Jul 2024, at 14:11, libor.peltan <libor.peltan@nic.cz> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Dne 17. 07. 24 v 2:18 Mark Andrews napsal(a):
>> It is possible to have only burn a single DS Digest Type Algorithm and support
>> multiple future algorithms by encoding the actual DS Digest Type Algorithm as
>> the first byte of the current digest field.
> 
> This is certainly possible, but I think both approches have their dis/advantages.
> 
> I guess having the dry-run DS and regular DS look equivalent would be more comprehensible to DNSSEC beginners.
> 
> I seem to remember this discussion has already been performed. If the authors considered both approaches and decided for the burning-algorithm method, they might want to summarize the arguments in the draft.
> 
> Libor
>

v2.45.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status