[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: Miek Gieben <miekg@nlnetlabs.nl>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@cafax.se>
From: Brian Wellington <Brian.Wellington@nominum.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:41:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20001023140642.A19769@nlnetlabs.nl>
Sender: owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject: Re: keysets at the registry

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Miek Gieben wrote:

> Were having the following problem.
> 
> I'm playing a registry, and for now i have 1 child: nlnetlabs.nl.nl.
> 
> The child want to be secure, so it sends a keyset to me.
> That keyset contains the public key and a sig with
> an expiration and inception time.
> 
> Now it is time for the registry to sign the key of nlnetlabs.nl.nl.
> So i give the following command:
> /nlnl/sbin/dnssec-signkey nlnetlabs.nl.nl.keyset ../Knl.nl.+001+26773.private 
> 
> This results in nlnetlabs.nl.nl.signedkey with the _same_ 
> expiration and inception time as the original keyset.

This is an omission in dnssec-signkey.  It will be in a later version,
probably bind 9.1.  The plan was to have the child specify a validity
period that it desired, but this could be overridden by the parent.

> When this sigs expires and the registry wants to resign the keyset, it
> must get a new keyset from the child.
> 
> Is this really necessary? Why not only send a key to the registry?

Several reasons.  As Ed mentioned, the TTL needs to be included.  
Including a hint as to the validity period is also useful.  Also,
dnssec-signkey can attempt to verify the SIG records, which shows that the
creator of the key set possessed the private keys associated with the
public keys in the file.

Brian


Home | Date list | Subject list