Re: US government mandates? use of DNSSEC by federal agencies

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 09:22:40AM -0700, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > > Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 16:53:24 -0400
> > > From: "Bill Bogstad" <bogstad () pobox com>
> > >
> > > Not sure what this will actually mean in the long run, but it's at
> > > least worth noting.
> > >
> > > http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/46987-1.html
> > > http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2008/m08-23.pdf
> >
> > It will mean something in the medium term as '.gov' and '.org' will be
> > signed very soon and OMB might be able to even get the root
> > signed. (Since OMB can pull funding, no one argues with them much.)
> > All of this will increase pressure on Verisign to deal with '.com' and
> > '.net'.
> >
> > Note that this only has an impact on '.gov' and the zones immediately
> > below it, but I suspect most sub-domains of *.gov will be signed as a
> > result of this, even if it is not required.
>
> So the question I have is... will operators (ISP, etc) turn on DNSsec
> checking? Or a more basic question of whether you even _could_ turn on
> checking if you were so inclined?

        I know that we made sure it was turned on as part of our
patch process for our customer facing resolvers.  IIRC the default
may have changed in bind as well if you actually read the changelog.

2405.   [cleanup]       The default value for dnssec-validation was changed to
                        "yes" in 9.5.0-P1 and all subsequent releases; this
                        was inadvertently omitted from CHANGES at the time.

        - Jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared () puck nether net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.