OK - so I read RFC7344... Automating DNSSEC Delegation Trust Maintenance
There are two interesting paragraphs.....
_/5. CDS/CDNSKEY Publication/_/
//
// The Child DNS Operator publishes CDS/CDNSKEY RRset(s). In order to//
// be valid, the CDS/CDNSKEY RRset(s) MUST be compliant with the rules//
// in Section 4.1. *When the Parent DS is in sync with the CDS/CDNSKEY*/*/
/**/ RRset(s), the Child DNS Operator MAY delete the CDS/CDNSKEY
RRset(s);/*/
// the Child can determine if this is the case by querying for DS//
// records in the Parent./
_/6.1.1. CDS/CDNSKEY Polling/_/
//
// This is the only defined use of CDS/CDNSKEY resource records in this//
// document. There are limits to the scalability of polling techniques;//
// thus, some other mechanism is likely to be specified later that//
// addresses CDS/CDNSKEY resource record usage in the situation where//
// polling runs into scaling issues. Having said that, polling will//
// work in many important cases such as enterprises, universities, and//
// smaller TLDs. In many regulatory environments, the Registry is//
// prohibited from talking to the Registrant. In most of these cases,//
// the Registrant has a business relationship with the Registrar, so the//
// Registrar can offer this as a service.//
//
//*If the CDS/CDNSKEY RRset(s) do not exist, the Parental Agent MUST*/*/
/**/ take no action. Specifically, it MUST NOT delete or alter the/**/
/**/ existing DS RRset./*
I'm confused. There is no text describing how a Key Rollover might work.
The Child can delete the CDS once it believed the Parent has activated
the appropriate DS. There is no discussion on how a Parent will know to
remove that DS record... unless it is via asking the Child for all
existing DNSKEY records of type 257 and then recalculating the DS
records and working out what is missing. Then we don't need CDS records
at all - just Poll for DNSKEY records?
I think I really prefer the simplicity of mirroring the CDS's of a Child
into the DS's on the Parent. Makes handling of Null CDS records easier.
On 2022/11/24 09:50, Matthijs Mekking wrote:
Hi,
I think this should work with some caveats.
This is true for BIND 9, as it will publish the CDS for as long as the
DS should be in the parent. But it doesn't have to be the case. The
RFC (7344) says:
When the Parent DS is in sync with the CDS/CDNSKEY
RRset(s), the Child DNS Operator MAY delete the CDS/CDNSKEY RRset(s);
the Child can determine if this is the case by querying for DS
records in the Parent.
--
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
m...@posix.co.za Tel: +27.826010496 <tel:+27826010496>
--
Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from
this list
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
