Re: [dnssd] [dnssd-wg/draft-ietf-dnssd-srp] possible non-compliant KEY RR flags field used for example in Appendix C (Issue #24)

[Alexander Clouter <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024, at 16:13, Ted Lemon wrote:
> Alexander Clouter identified in a recent github issue on
> draft-ietf-dnssd-srp that our support for the KEY RR looks like it's based
> on RFC2535, but RFC2535 was updated by RFC3445. Unfortunately RFC3445
> doesn't explicitly update RFC2931, so we missed this. However, the change
> is, I think, purely editorial, so should be fine to do at this stage. I've
> updated the example Alexander cites to change the flags value from 513 to
> 0, and added text in the requestor and registrar sections of
> draft-ietf-dnssd-srp pointing to RFC3445's requirement for setting the
> flags to 0 (requestor) and not checking the flags (registrar).

The 'key id' comment also requires amending to 14495:
----
$ cat demo 
;demo. 10 IN DNSKEY 513 3 13 ( qweEmaaq0FAWok5//ftuQtZgiZoiFSUsm0srWREdywQU 9dpvtOhrdKWUuPT3uEFF5TZU6B4q1z1I662GdaUwqg== )
demo. 10 IN DNSKEY   0 3 13 ( qweEmaaq0FAWok5//ftuQtZgiZoiFSUsm0srWREdywQU 9dpvtOhrdKWUuPT3uEFF5TZU6B4q1z1I662GdaUwqg== )

$ dnssec-dsfromkey -A -f demo 
demo. IN DS 14495 13 2 7FB66BEDBD76E23593FBCF637BD912717F11376198A3CBA74F7BE6304C026574
----

The calculation is effectively a rolling sum so those with a keen eye will notice 15008-513=14495.

Thanks