IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment

Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> Thu, 24 February 2011 13:51 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 535E03A6B1F; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:51:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31BA33A6B26 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:51:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 qzBBGqfTMFIS for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:51:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from taffy.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (taffy.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU [192.150.187.26]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAA1E3A6B1F for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:51:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from albook.hsd1.ca.comcast.net (c-67-164-126-174.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.164.126.174]) (Authenticated sender: nweaver) by taffy.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4FA36A58B; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:52:45 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
From: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikHm62x=+xWpSRyERw2cB31yZZhVkTT-90dgFjk@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 05:52:46 -0800
Message-Id: <39EBBA76-22F1-4935-9300-B0078B229793@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>
References: <20110216165921.GW96213@shinkuro.com> <3B90ED2E-980D-4B01-889F-447D66D0B58D@insensate.co.uk> <20110216174011.GZ96213@shinkuro.com> <20110218143653.GC84482@bikeshed.isc.org> <20110218151209.GF66684@shinkuro.com> <4D5EEE09.4080405@dougbarton.us> <20110218222950.GL74065@shinkuro.com> <4D5F270F.20401@abenaki.wabanaki.net> <199C7B2B4228461FB024E59A990DB46D@ics.forth.gr> <4D641DB6.4090705@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20110222205617.GS53815@shinkuro.com> <4D64489B.7020901@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <713D992A-1DB9-4F72-9D18-8E923AD51D8D@icsi.berkeley.edu> <AANLkTikf2ixw7JkxQiRBobv-seYnaYS0E3G8TboosnA=@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1102231029260.27602@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <AANLkTin6-mXBeKC_TzgvWUaCyxKfeZxTK1BQvXtpwuCN@mail.gmail.com> <4CC95816-8225-4CAE-897F-3F13F965BCEE@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1102240953550.5244@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <AANLkTiniVDDZXFOV4WryNN=+hK29rBO8_HTAqw7bK=Nf@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikZYBYyRKkZzMCuCJbVpqLx-2BBYW3TSMQ8ZL81@mail.gmai l.com> <8657EF4A-A08D-46E5-8917-553AE377CAD8@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU> <AANLkTikHm62x=+xWpSRyERw2cB31yZZhVkTT-90dgFjk@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
Cc: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>, dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] we need help to make names the same, was draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-02 comment
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

On Feb 24, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

> So you are saying that it is TOO LATE to make a change that would have major impact on the practice of domain management?

I'm stating that your "nobody validates DNSSEC" claim is demonstrably false.

> It really has to be one or the other. Either it is too late to make major change or its all on the table. 
> 
> Or alternatively, the proposed use case may not justify a major change.

OR the notion of online signature generation is not a change at all, but is something already supported in the protocol [1] and supported by at least two implementations.



[1] Where does the protocol require that signature generation is off-line?  

The key feature for data integrity is that the validating party is NOT necessarily the party contacting the authority.
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email