At 10:39 -0500 1/21/10, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:14:41AM -0500, Edward Lewis wrote:
So many assumptions have changed...but the idea of KSK/ZSK hasn't.
Maybe this is the problem?
Problem?
Not everyone has an automated registration interface (making that a
reason to have a KSK/ZSK still hold).
And the key word above is "assumptions" - once we know for a fact
that a ZSK of 1024 bits is good for a year no matter how much it is
used and that it's okay to roll it, etc., then we might be able to
drop the KSK idea. So long as it hasn't already been burned into
operational (institutional) practices.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468
As with IPv6, the problem with the deployment of frictionless surfaces is
that they're not getting traction.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
