Re: [DNSOP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6781 (6692)

2021-09-24 Thread Matthijs Mekking
I am going to assume that the DNSKEY of this zone is not a trust anchor. So it is going to use the DS RRset, not a cached DNSKEY RRset, to authenticate the child zone's apex DNSKEY RRset (the one from the response). Then from RFC 4035: o The matching DNSKEY RR in the child zone has the

Re: [DNSOP] DNSOPNSEC3 Guidance - zone size impact of opt-out

2021-09-24 Thread Wes Hardaker
Alexander Mayrhofer writes: > thanks for putting together draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec3-guidance. I have > one small comment regarding section 2.2 (Flags): After reading the conversation, I think the easiest thing to do is add this: or when using memory-constrained hardware. To the end of the

Re: [DNSOP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6781 (6692)

2021-09-24 Thread Paul Wouters
On Fri, 24 Sep 2021, Matthijs Mekking wrote: Second, I believe the corner case you mentioned is for Figure 15 (the one in Appendix D), and I don't understand the scenario you are describing. What do you mean with "the resolver getting the DNKSEY RRset for NS_B would not contain a valid key

Re: [DNSOP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6781 (6692)

2021-09-24 Thread Matthijs Mekking
Paul, On 23-09-2021 15:52, Paul Wouters wrote: On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Matthijs Mekking wrote: You are referring to text that describes Figure 10. The following text in Section 4.3.5.1 refers to the figure in Appendix D:    The requirement to exchange signatures has a couple of drawbacks.  It