This is a real problem, and I plan to look at it (and all the other
stuff I've been ignoring.....) ASAP. I'm moving house just now, so very
short of time. If I don't produce something by the end of next week,
please prod me again.



On 27/03/17 16:37, Patryk Szczygłowski wrote:
> Hello,
> I have domain signed with DNSSEC: <>
> The issue is, the parent <> is completely void of
> DNSSEC support (and it will probably never get fixed).
> Therefore:
> - . is signed
> - .pl is signed, no DS for <>
> - <> is NOT signed, no DNSKEY, no DS for
> <>
> - <> is signed
> My domain is registered with <>, but this
> not important anymore, as they announced closing down.
> Have a look here:
> The issue is dnsmasq is returning BOGUS instead of INSECURE. In
> consequence the domain does not resolve.
> I believe it is in contradiction with RFC:
> It should mark BOGUS only if top-bottom validation determies DS in
> parent but missing DNSKEY in child.
> Current behaviour is promoting a race condition, when the domain owner
> enabled DNSSEC, but didn't upload DS to parent and/or it didn't propagate.
> The same situation was few years ago, when TLDs were gradually enabled,
> when for a while they were signed with DNSKEY without DS being set on
> parent, only to be put several months later. There are still unsigned
> TLDs and I think they will stop being resolved completely when this
> happens again.
> Google Public DNS behaviour is correct.
> -- 
> Patryk Szczygłowski
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to