Re: [dns-privacy] TLSA for secure resolver-auth transport (was: Possible use case: Opportunistic encryption for recursive to authoritative)

2020-11-15 Thread Peter van Dijk
On Wed, 2020-08-12 at 12:51 +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote: > Delegation NS records are not signed, so do we stick -those- (or a hash > of the NSset perhaps?) into DS? https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fujiwara-dnsop-delegation-information-signer/?include_text=1 Kind regards, -- Peter van

Re: [dns-privacy] TLSA for secure resolver-auth transport (was: Possible use case: Opportunistic encryption for recursive to authoritative)

2020-08-12 Thread Paul Wouters
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020, Peter van Dijk wrote: On Mon, 10 Aug 2020, Peter van Dijk wrote: On Thu, 2020-08-06 at 23:04 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: In the case of encrypted DNS to authoritative servers, those servers obviously can have an cryptographic ID based on FQDN. This is not obvious. It

Re: [dns-privacy] TLSA for secure resolver-auth transport (was: Possible use case: Opportunistic encryption for recursive to authoritative)

2020-08-12 Thread Ilari Liusvaara
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 12:51:34PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote: > (I changed the subject because this has turned into a solution > conversation, instead of a use case conversation) > > On Tue, 2020-08-11 at 21:49 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Aug 2020, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > > > >

[dns-privacy] TLSA for secure resolver-auth transport (was: Possible use case: Opportunistic encryption for recursive to authoritative)

2020-08-12 Thread Peter van Dijk
(I changed the subject because this has turned into a solution conversation, instead of a use case conversation) On Tue, 2020-08-11 at 21:49 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: > On Mon, 10 Aug 2020, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > > On Thu, 2020-08-06 at 23:04 -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: > > > In the case of