nanog mailing list archives

Re: hat tip to .gov hostmasters


From: bmanning () vacation karoshi com
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:19:46 +0000

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:52:42AM -0400, Jason Frisvold wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Scott Francis <darkuncle () gmail com> wrote:
nice to see a wholesale DNSSEC rollout underway (I must confess to being a
little surprised at the source, too!). Granted, it's a much more manageable
problem set than, say, .com - but if one US-controlled TLD can do it, hope
is buoyed for a .com rollout sooner rather than later (although probably not
much sooner :)).

I'm not much up on DNSSEC, but don't you need to be using a resolver
that recognizes DNSSEC in order for this to be useful?

/sf


-- 
Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
XenoPhage0 () gmail com
http://blog.godshell.com


        yes and no.  to fully trust the data from the servers you need
        three things:

        ) signed data (this is what .gov is doing)
        ) a validator in the end system (this is mostly missing/not configured today)
        ) accurate trust anchors from a couple of places in the DNS namespace ##

        however,
        
        if all you start with is signed data - it becomes possible to verify the
        source of the data - independently of inline DNS validation.  e.g. you 
        can - with a high degree of certainty, be assured that the root zone you 
        load is really the ORSN root and not that flaky root from DoC/ICANN/VSGN... :)

        so "naked" signed data, in the absence of TA's or validators is still
        useful.


## you'll need a couple of these - and how you get them and keep them up to date is
   still a mostly unsolved operational problem.

--bill


Current thread: