Correct, applied your corrected text to the work in progress document.

Best regards,
  Matthijs

On 09/18/2012 01:55 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Section 4.1.3. This description of a variant rollover is dangerous: the
> new key must sign the DNSKEY RRset before the DS change, even if signing
> the rest of the zone is delayed.
> 
>    This rollover has the drawback that it introduces double signatures
>    over all data of the zone.  Taking these zone size considerations
>    into account, it is possible to not introduce the signatures made
>    with DNSKEY_S_2 at the "new DNSKEY" step.  Instead, signatures of
>    DNSKEY_S_1 are replaced with signatures of DNSKEY_S_2 in an
>    additional stage between the "DS change" and "DNSKEY removal" step:
>    After the DS RRset containing DS_S_1 has expired from distant caches,
>    the signatures can be swapped.  Only after the new signatures made
>    with DNSKEY_S_2 have been propagated, the old public key DNSKEY_S_1
>    can be removed from the DNSKEY RRset.
> 
> Corrected text:
> 
>    This rollover has the drawback that it introduces double signatures
>    over all data of the zone.  Taking these zone size considerations
>    into account, it is possible to not introduce the signatures made
>    with DNSKEY_S_2 at the "new DNSKEY" step, except for the signature
>    over the DNSKEY RRset.  Instead, signatures of DNSKEY_S_1 in the rest
>    of the zone are replaced with signatures of DNSKEY_S_2 in an
>    additional stage between the "DS change" and "DNSKEY removal" step:
>    After the DS RRset containing DS_S_1 has expired from distant caches,
>    the signatures can be swapped.  Only after the new signatures made
>    with DNSKEY_S_2 have been propagated, the old public key DNSKEY_S_1
>    can be removed from the DNSKEY RRset.
> 
> Tony.
> 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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

Reply via email to