John R Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > > I'm also thinking the hash wouldn't need to include the RRSIG records, since > those are mechanically derived from the underlying records and the ZSK.
If you omit the RRSIGs from the hash, you'll have to verify all the RRSIGs to ensure you aren't serving a bogus zone, and this is more expensive than including the RRSIGs in the hash. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ Tyne, Dogger: South or southeast veering southwest 4 or 5, occasionally 6 in Dogger. Slight or moderate. Showers. Good. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
