I have a few comments about draft-wkumari-dnsop-trust-management-00. (I hope I'm not repeating something already commented on)
- I think the body (not appendix) of the draft should discuss what the TA maintainer is supposed to do. In its current document organization the main sections of the draft only define a new RR type (TDS) and the expected behavior of recursive servers (with a very brief sentence about the maintainer in the first paragraph of Section 2.1). These don't address (one of) the main motivation described in Section 1: During the recent effort to roll the IANA DNSSEC "root key", it has become clear that, in order to predict (and minimize) outages caused by rolling the key, one needs to know who does not have the new key. More specifically, I think a generalized version of the following part of Appendix B should be included in the main part of the draft: [...] The trust anchor maintainer will observe resolvers change from quering for 17 to querying for _17-42. [...] - Likewise, I suggest a main section states more clearly that a TDS RRset consists of RRs for all currently published (key-signing) DNSKEYs. It's currently only described through an example in Appendix B: _17 IN TDS 17 5 1 111222 IN TDS 42 8 2 333444 - I also think it should explain more explicitly how the approach using TDS could address this point: In addition, RFC5011 style key rolls require "double signing", which significantly increases the size of the responses. - On Section 3: [...] It will receive back either an error (e.g NoError / NoData), or a TDS RRSet. In the case of error, isn't it more likely to be NXDOMAIN? Likewise, 2. There is no TDS record (you get NoError / NoData). You have I suspect this will also more likely to be NXDOMAIN. - Slightly related to the previous point, the owner name of a TDS RRset cannot be on a zone cut (right?). In the case of the root zone, is it guaranteed by an ICANN restriction or something? What about other TLDs such as .com? (We wouldn't need TDS for .com if the root employs it, though). For other general cases it's probably up to the maintainer's decision (either reserve this set of names or give up using TDS), but it may be useful to note this point explicitly. -- JINMEI, Tatuya _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop