Re: [DNSOP] RFC4641-bis: The case for single active key

2010-07-07 Thread Olaf Kolkman
On Jun 17, 2010, at 11:15 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: Currently section 3 of the document mandates that all zones be signed using the KSK+ZSK model, I content this is outdated advice. Version 02 of the draft offers the choice. And in fact it starts of by saying (in 3.1 second paragraph)

Re: [DNSOP] RFC4641-bis: The case for single active key

2010-06-18 Thread Rose, Scott W.
On Jun 17, 2010, at 5:15 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: Proposal #1: The document should describe both single key and split key operations and provide real guidance as to when each model is appropriate. Here is a draft of parameters that should be used to guide selection of single vs

[DNSOP] RFC4641-bis: The case for single active key

2010-06-17 Thread Olafur Gudmundsson
Currently section 3 of the document mandates that all zones be signed using the KSK+ZSK model, I content this is outdated advice. Background #1: Why bring this up now While reviewing draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-dps-framework I found myself loving certain sections of the document and hating other

Re: [DNSOP] RFC4641-bis: The case for single active key

2010-06-17 Thread Eric Rescorla
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Olafur Gudmundsson o...@ogud.com wrote: Background #3: Key strengths and life time RSA and DSA algorithms have the interesting property that the number of bits in the key can be selected, by adding bits to the key the key gets stronger. Stronger keys can be

Re: [DNSOP] RFC4641-bis: The case for single active key

2010-06-17 Thread Olafur Gudmundsson
On 17/06/2010 5:34 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Olafur Gudmundssono...@ogud.com wrote: Background #3: Key strengths and life time RSA and DSA algorithms have the interesting property that the number of bits in the key can be selected, by adding bits to the key the