IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Related to section 5.1 of dnssec-bis-updates (-14)

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Fri, 13 January 2012 22:50 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B5B21F8492; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:50:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1326495033; bh=SMnIsXApZWr7b9v2XI6LlUJH9yY7zqJlwwtdzekgYdM=; h=To:From:References:In-reply-to:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=stg7qZBqRUI/Q8SY1HlHycNYW2cqdlNfKB/utxLAZQ1KTM1xbel7EzKK6fbIa7WHd Hig0q52H/CWDmgesw0rjE+3vJOBjw6+HrIaSiodSx/JRcXvcOr7s3nq3P80buxQbYW CpVZeA+/RaCj+5PQV6p0QiXyxt+qDeLcqWAHX7iU=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27CF21F846E for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:50:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.464
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r8t6Z79Ji-oJ for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:50:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::2b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217E821F8466 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:50:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60D86C9484; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:50:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:1065:29aa:23b5:a4e6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E1A3216C6B; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:50:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org)
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642F21B13171; Sat, 14 Jan 2012 09:50:13 +1100 (EST)
To: Mohan Parthasarathy <suruti94@gmail.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <a06240801cabc9d0de24d@192.168.129.103> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201122318080.86374@fledge.watson.org> <CACU5sDnPJxPqQJ455iDeyvLaABk0HUnvNh1aPeq21XQuevqKkg@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:33:13 -0800." <CACU5sDnPJxPqQJ455iDeyvLaABk0HUnvNh1aPeq21XQuevqKkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 09:50:13 +1100
Message-Id: <20120113225013.642F21B13171@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Cc: Samuel Weiler <weiler@watson.org>, dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Related to section 5.1 of dnssec-bis-updates (-14)
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

In message <CACU5sDnPJxPqQJ455iDeyvLaABk0HUnvNh1aPeq21XQuevqKkg@mail.gmail.com>
, Mohan Parthasarathy writes:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Samuel Weiler <weiler@watson.org> wrote:
> > I don't recall seeing much discussion of the below. =A0As doc editor, I w=
> ould
> > like to hear an extra voice or three chime in before I fix this.
> >
> > As I understand Ed's message, the (signer) name in an RRSIG does need to =
> be
> > downcased. =A0The next name in a NSEC RR does NOT need to be downcased. =
> =A0Is
> > that right?
> +1. Sometime back there was an email thread (which I can't locate now)
> where the signature verification failed if you don't downcase for
> something in .US zone.
> 
> -mohan

named downcases the RRSIG's Signer's Name
named does not downcase NSEC's Next Domain Name.

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email