IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: https at ietf.org

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Mon, 25 November 2013 15:42 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A74BF1ADF10 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
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 Wq6yrZRQwP0v for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og124.obsmtp.com (exprod7og124.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667051ADED5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob124.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUpNv13pcPiC5olku74juPZfyiVhknl4a@postini.com; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:16 PST
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31C31B82A4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C65219005C; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:42:15 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Subject: Re: https at ietf.org
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <A1F7405B-CD8D-4DB8-9817-71F29AE14266@hopcount.ca>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 10:42:12 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <E760A0D0-57E1-44F5-AF0C-32F87E4C55FF@nominum.com>
References: <CAHBU6ivbrk=NXgd4_5Upik+8H0AbHRy3kJnN=8fcK+Bz3pOV9Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.01.1311051733570.4200@egate.xpasc.com> <01P0FR4HDQNG00004G@mauve.mrochek.com> <CAHBU6ivZS33r4HHbCC391Ug9fMtZkJ3nojEeeqH5L+0+o3ZqGQ@mail.gmail.com> <01P0FU0CS96Q00004G@mauve.mrochek.com> <26C6A672-A5D2-44C4-B343-9CCE5E388348@standardstrack.com> <CAKHUCzzzT-0p89uT62zrxGqF1XACG+Ok7hNLcuTaDad7R7eCTQ@mail.gmail.com> <527C2233.3030605@cis-india.org> <CAKHUCzzcNros1=O=D1zkEU1n+XdRcdYdgK2Hkik=AvxbuUJX3w@mail.gmail.com> <731D4B97-BC19-4AC8-BEF6-DA702073069A@standardstrack.com> <A1F7405B-CD8D-4DB8-9817-71F29AE14266@hopcount.ca>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Cc: IETF-Discussion Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 15:42:16 -0000

On Nov 25, 2013, at 10:38 AM, Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> wrote:
> Isn't this at least part of the motivation behind DANE?
> 
> (I realise DANE requires moving parts in the client and signatures in the published zone, but it seems odd that it hasn't been mentioned.)

Is the DNSSEC root key secure against National Security Letters?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email