On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:


From this perspective we might roll a ZSK more frequently than a KSK because the ZSK needs to be stored on-line to facilitate re-signing when the zone
changes. With the KSK we have the option of keeping it off-line, and
arguably the risk of compromise is consequently lower. Regular testing of
the machinery is still important, however.

Again, this seems like an argument for the ZSK/KSK split, which I'm not really arguing against (I haven't developed an opinion). My argument is purely against generating a new ZSK every time you sign it with the KSK. I don't think that provides much security benefit and certainly does have plenty of
room for error.


Aha, I agree, FWIW there is no such requirement/suggestion in 4641 or 4641 bis.

--Olaf


________________________________________________________

Olaf M. Kolkman                        NLnet Labs
                                       Science Park 140,
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/               1098 XG Amsterdam

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to