Dne 16.10.2014 v 20:01 Petr Spacek napsal(a):
On 16.10.2014 19:43, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Dne 16.10.2014 v 17:59 Martin Basti napsal(a):
On 10/10/14 09:17, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 10/09/2014 03:57 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:

it would be great if people could look at current state of DNSSEC
patches for

It consist of several relatively independent parts:
- python-pkcs#11 interface written by Martin Basti:

- DNSSEC daemons written by me:

- FreeIPA integration written by Martin Basti:
Here is updated repo with installers, please review:
branch dnssec-4

TODO: integrate ipadnssecd daemons and pkcs11 helper, when finished



Not something you can fix in this commit, but shouldn't
ipa-ods-exporter be
named ipa-odsexportd, so that the naming is consistent with the rest
of our

Side note: ipa-ods-exporter is not a daemon :-) It is single-shot binary
activated via socket. It is replacement for "ODS signer" and uses the
same protocol.

Anyway, I don't care much. Feel free pick a new name and let me know.

Nevermind, I thought it was a daemon.


Why do you use the default /etc/softhsm2.conf file, instead of using e.g.
/etc/ipa/dnssec/softhsm2.conf and passing it to SoftHSM in the
environment variable?

I don't like the idea. The same library is used from named and
ods-enforcerd so we would have to modify environment variables for all
of them and do some monkey patching in /etc/systemd.

AFAIK current ipactl/framework is sooo clever so it deletes service
files related to all services "managed" by IPA if they are located in
/etc/systemd. As a result we don't have any way how to override values
supplies by other packages now.

IMO if we can have a private instance of something we should have it. To configure named properly, you just have to add a line with "SOFTHSM2_CONF=/etc/ipa/dnssec/softhsm2.conf" to /etc/sysconfig/named.


I think /etc/ipa/softhsm_pin_so should be moved to

Is it a good idea to store both PINs on the same spot? softhsm_pin_so is
not necessary at run-time so it can be readable only by root:root.

What do you mean by "the same spot"?

Commit "DNSSEC: validate forwarders":


I'm not sure if failing on DNSSEC-disabled forwarders by default is a
idea. Perhaps there could be some auto-detection code? Something along
lines of:

    if forwarders_support_dnssec:
        if not options.no_dnssec_validation:
        print "WARNING: DNSSEC will not be enabled"

We have discussed this with Martin and the intent is to tell people that
their infrastructure is broken and has to be fixed - sooner is better.

There is an option --no-dnssec-validation for people who like broken

Jan Cholasta

Freeipa-devel mailing list

Reply via email to