IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Nothing more useful to say About key tags

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 04 March 2024 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 BFD71C1654EF for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:49:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.858
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.858 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="GZrwfg2O"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="GZz5uUEr"
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 agRePXy_xcxE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:49:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 E2922C17C8BA for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:48:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 39106 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2024 18:48:42 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=98c065e6178a.k2403; bh=846kp4yGu8odtf/AlDvBekVHD02XhS+QnBLWfFzlaWc=; b=GZrwfg2O0NcAJQhfDVnvmtp/6mRaP2VJT+Nh2IZ9hVd3kXRnCdBpurL6LJh4Dz7DGNBaxcKh2bA6uTDluE2Y1REKTqXKY0roqlr6iqNbLQRzyY3qj9fN86+MqclTIh9YsJRVKNTzLgOTvYUqVf7bs++y39rBOu1psIJU0+DPKrWzZNMRiX2/794MX3lN3mRARXP8zQ0CRJ+ONZjbmmGioJjXQoeAXbAb3WBxChfjnyrN3kRAvEnplQD7T4xMRPhja6GGh5A0WsG1g2maCOno5g/LAqGzXJU+xYxqxZxpv3NMwtRTIey62Bz4TQj9lsRCZD6WLnolgu6SVbABuksgvA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=98c065e6178a.k2403; bh=846kp4yGu8odtf/AlDvBekVHD02XhS+QnBLWfFzlaWc=; b=GZz5uUEr5wL+YGtXlDrdm6xi5RO8q8es1XydkjlG7u3o3DYg1+yJiZO3SbHD8uM7KPXeq8LT6d4psJ6Y4oZr0UmHWQBMs+jzx2U4Xqd8CYq4g9L3CBE0uJ4vLdrZ1WE29xdSE0kowqhsfdwwAx1XK7SRYjviuIkxv9V4c0SNZVCuYWrzwlEEX8Z/6/ftpSSQr9bHT7EFkOPnpXfRx78/3bH5zXcyESPFNnmThx2/RvJoMoDEwSXW3I13ZrjLtSCET4apmPWe9FVfD/PqJTsVU/K90gK+tHgmQU9lHSidxr9vWj1B1CI8QoBHqBFYEwFDNgsQZNOCN0VnuuLnJ75wIQ==
Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD) via TCP6; 04 Mar 2024 18:48:42 -0000
Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 70541845FC12; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 14:48:41 -0400 (AST)
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2024 14:48:41 -0400
Message-Id: <20240304184841.70541845FC12@ary.local>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: pch-dnsop-5@u-1.phicoh.com
In-Reply-To: <m1rh3gl-0000KqC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/y50KR_zWeQ1F0p9iWmlF9lpnM6I>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] Nothing more useful to say About key tags
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 04 Mar 2024 18:49:07 -0000

It appears that Philip Homburg  <pch-dnsop-5@u-1.phicoh.com> said:
>What I mean is that if we take all of the standards track DNSSEC RFCs and we
>add a new RFC that says something to the effect:
>1) A signer MUST NOT sign a DS or DNSKEY RRset if the set has duplicate key
>   tags.
>2) An authoritative DNS server MUST not serve a set of RRSIG records that 
>   corresponds to a single RRset where the collection of RRSIG records has a
>   duplicate key tag.
>
>then as far as I can tell, there is no conflict with currently published
>standards track DNSSEC RFCs. 

Not at all. This would be an incompatible change that breaks existing
working DNS configurations, for at most a trivial simplification in
load limiting code many years from now, even assuming people were to
implement it.

No.  Just plain no.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email