Hi

I have some comments on the document draft-barwood-dnsop-ds-publish-01:

1. Introduction (3rd paragraph)
It is not always the case that the child is the one defining the DS RRset. Some 
parents wants (for some reason) to create the DS RRset based on their own 
policy (choice of hash) and based on what DNSKEY RR the child send in.

1. Introduction (5th paragraph)
The CDS RR would not be used for automation of rollovers but rather the 
automated key exchange from child to parent. (Key exchange is one step in the 
rollover process)

3. Resource Record Format (3rd paragraph)
I do not think you should limit what key type can be used for creating the 
signature for this RRset. As long as the parent can verify it using the 
previous DS RRset via the child's DNSKEY RRset. In fact, forcing the use of KSK 
for this RRset's signature will break some assumptions in the key timing draft.

3. Usage (1st paragraph)
How do you know what name server to send the NOTIFY to? SOA MNAME? Configurable 
option? Service discovery? etc

3. Usage (2nd paragraph)
I think you should change the SHOULD to a MUST: "The parent zone MUST attempt 
to authenticate"

3. Usage (2nd paragraph)
"If the authentication succeeds or yields Insecure, extra security checks are 
not normally necessary"
This statement makes it possible to do a DoS on this zone. An attacker could 
send a DS to the parent in the name of the unsigned child. This means that this 
draft should only be used after that the first initial key exchange has been 
done, where the parent can actually use DNSSEC to verify the changes.

3. Usage (3rd paragraph)
Nothing prevents you from having a DS RR pointing to a zone signing key. Thus 
no need to do this check.

3. Usage (7th paragraph)
And since I am trying to remove the constraint on only using a KSK to create a 
signature for this RRset, you should also change:
"where a key signing key has been compromised"
to
"where a key has been compromised"

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

Reply via email to