On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Doug Barton wrote:

Because NSEC3 uses a hash function there is an unimaginably small chance
that two different hostnames could produce the same hash output, and and
even smaller chance that such a collision could be exploitable by an
attacker. This issue SHOULD NOT be a factor in making an operational
decision about which type of signing to use. See [RFC5155] for more
information, including the relevant mathematical background.

4641bis is "DNSSEC Operational Practices". Why add something and then
immediatley say "SHOULD NOT be a factor"?

This is not Matlock :)

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

Reply via email to