Looking forward to discussions on the draft in a few weeks.
-- 
Glen Wiley

Principal Engineer
Verisign, Inc.
(571) 230-7917

A5E5 E373 3C75 5B3E 2E24
6A0F DC65 2354 9946 C63A




On 3/11/15, 5:55 AM, "Warren Kumari" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:31 AM, W.C.A. Wijngaards <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi Zhiwei Yan,
>>
>> On 03/11/2015 04:24 AM, Zhiwei Yan wrote:
>>> Hi, All, I have a simple idea to support the encryption of the
>>> signalings between stub and recursive resolvers under UDP. My
>>> solution is based on asymmetric encryption scheme and the main
>>> points are as following:
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wijngaards-dnsop-confidentialdns-03
>>
>> This draft follows the points you list.  Perhaps, it is one way to
>> fulfil the details in what you describe?
>>
>> It was first submitted to perpass, but then moved to the DNSOP WG, and
>> now, a bit later, it can be considered by the DPRIVE working group.
>
>And a reminder to all to please read this draft -- many folk already
>have (during the perpass / pre-IETF times) but it will be discussed at
>the meeting in Dallas, so re-reading it have the info fresh would be
>good.
>
>W
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>    Wouter
>>
>>
>>> o Firstly, the stub resolver and recursive resolver should
>>> generate an asymmetric key pair respectively and we denote then as
>>> KEY-S and KEY-R.  For the KEY-S, the private key is denoted as
>>> KEY-S-pub and the public key is denoted as KEY-S-pri.  Similarly,
>>> for the KEY-R, the private key is denoted as KEY-R-pub and the
>>> public key is denoted as KEY-R-pri. o In order to publish the
>>> public key of recursive resolver, KEY- R-pub can be included in an
>>> option of DHCP message or in the RR of DNS following DANE
>>> protocols.  Anyway, the stub resolver should learn the KEY-R-pub
>>> during its bootstrap phase and update it securely and easily. o
>>> When the stub resolver sends DNS request message to the recursive
>>> resolver, the KEY-S-pub should be contained in this message.
>>> Besides, the DNS request message is encrypted by the KEY-R-pub. o
>>> After receiving the DNS request message, the recursive resolver
>>> decrypts the message with KEY-R-pri.  Then the recursive resolver
>>> records the information in the DNS request message, including the
>>> KEY-S-pub. o When the recursive resolver replies to the stub
>>> resolver, it encrypts the DNS response message with KEY-S-pub.
>>>
>>> Because the DNS request message sent from stub resolver to
>>> recursive resolver is encrypted by the public key of the recursive
>>> resolver, only the corresponding recursive resolve can decrypt that
>>> DNS request message.  In opposite, because the DNS response message
>>> sent from recursive resolver to stub resolver is encrypted by the
>>> public key of the stub resolver, only the corresponding stub
>>> resolver can decrypt that DNS response message.  In this way, the
>>> privacy of the exchanged messages between stub and recursive
>>> resolvers can be guaranteed.
>>>
>>> I just want to get some comments from you. If you think this
>>> solution makes sense, the draft will be published after the IETF
>>> meeting. BR, Zhiwei Yan
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-03-11
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing
>>> list [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
>>>
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1
>>
>> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU/+81AAoJEJ9vHC1+BF+NUfkQAK+l5gu3bvbFDz5UYTvs2ZAn
>> UNsM3WbJocFLBQVqS/Ky/dMX15RxnR1fBn9AwCKn6095hgU8OXjsiwUFx4+J48uI
>> 0Oy4OjfgrDchPYh8XnqFUVYmeVFzBwmsqRZnmwxRWoMZGzk4iBARlBBCF9VVW/Kl
>> qYREdv4J0GJSMJSQQjZ728+EIsyJqhUr0yNZQ3XaokM9hGNUpy6/IvfzSosmoEeT
>> im01bB5Oa4eO3cM+oTu9btzEJueePA8CrBtF98U18IBp0EhhF9lJP7xF/psrsiYx
>> p9oip9Y30BDDsYbjacNDdp9c35JRAemLLfQJa2MxW/O7cBiRZsOL3yTZUZ9590xz
>> uNh8/B2JCl6hs54hd7cpkuPMPrMhBc39t79n3dwdfgQph0w2M3VmlL/0DIxMeOBv
>> ixnVVfIejh/1trUo0q4mb84L2Gq92GFxQ8gwQTgiveEM6Eff6APEoTP6FZ3w9mE5
>> UFehPq5EwUjSz9pKWVNQrdojaXNP+CTs5HKYXVKkdh6xah0+J0iP80gp0JBiGM7Y
>> 34E0PhXxCm8LdglCbp/v6IDOCTT+O9wGeZ/P21HtFJAv8CW/NWbTRr7trL7N4rYU
>> F8tU5Yjaw8SFgug575yqXfv9vacTMCZVKK1S0IfdIvCn+UQl34F5rqDLaE5uStN+
>> kwdVXLAxnduq8h5EZ8i7
>> =5/cq
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dns-privacy mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
>
>
>
>-- 
>I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
>idea in the first place.
>This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
>regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
>of pants.
>   ---maf
>
>_______________________________________________
>dns-privacy mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

_______________________________________________
dns-privacy mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy

Reply via email to