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


To: GILBERT.R.LOOMIS@saic.com
Cc: jakob@crt.se, warlord@MIT.EDU, scottr@antd.nist.gov, dnssec@cafax.se
From: Havard Eidnes <he@uninett.no>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 12:51:43 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <3C1E3607B37295439F7C409EFBA08E680E267F@col-581-exs01.cist.saic.com>
Sender: owner-dnssec@cafax.se
Subject: Re: CERTificates and public keys

Hi,

I agree that using KEY for non-DNS key material is a bad idea, as you
stated.

> Is it then better to leave the current
> CERT record intact, or to deprecate it entirely
> in favor of APPKEY?  Personally I would prefer
> that there be only one type of record which DNS
> servers use to support "all the other keys" rather
> than having both CERT and APPKEY...it seems cleaner,
> and it allows DNS administrators (and implementors)
> to avoid worrying about the differences.

A key is not a certificate, and a certificate is not a key.

I think it would be a good idea to keep this distinction, and not
cause even more needless confusion over this issue by trying to use
only one RR type for both kinds of data.

Therefore, I would like to se CERT kept with its current meaning, and
a new RR (APPKEY) be created for "raw key material which relies on
DNSSEC for authenticity and integrity verificaiton".

Regards,

- Håvard

Home | Date list | Subject list