Thanks for the feed back Shumon, I agree that we should at least clarify where the responsibilities are so the mechanisms become more focused on smoothing the edges rather that compensating what the other party may not do. I also agree that fixed values might be more appropriated and the RDO should ensure time derivation will go beyond these values.
Yours, Daniel On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:50 AM Shumon Huque <shu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:34 AM Shumon Huque <shu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 4:49 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzme...@nic.fr> >> wrote: >> >> The draft apparently do not mention advices on expiration slack (such >>> as val-sig-skew-min and val-sig-skew-max in Unbound). Is there a >>> consensus on (I quote Unbound documentation) "The signature inception >>> and expiration dates are allowed to be off by 10% of the signature >>> lifetime"? >>> >> >> RFC 6781 Section 4.4.2 (Signature Validity Periods) does mention having >> a reasonable signature inception offset, but recommends no value. It does >> not mention a signature expiration skew. It would be good to treat this >> subject in the document. Personally, I would prefer a fixed value (~ 5 to >> 10 minutes) rather than a percentage. Otherwise, the validator may be >> using >> a possibly unacceptably small or large skew values depending on the >> validity >> interval. >> > > Just to quickly follow-up on my own post (sorry!), I realize this draft is > only > about validator requirements, but RFC6781 describers signer > recommendations. > > Still, the skew issue has come up for me recently in signer implementations > too. One commercial DNSSEC implementation we were using was generating > on-the-fly signatures with _no_ inception offset - which means if the > validator's > clock was off even slightly, and supported no skew, it would fail. It > required > some vigorous arguing with this vendor to get them to use an inception > offset. > So, the skew issue ideally needs to be addressed on both sides (and it > might > be reasonable to mention that in this draft). > > Shumon. > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > -- Daniel Migault Ericsson
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
