On 04/18/2011 16:14, George Barwood wrote:
- Original Message -
> From: "Paul Wouters"
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, George Barwood wrote:
(1) It's my belief that almost all Zones except for the root zone
should NOT use a KSK/ZSK split. With the signing of the root zone
and many TLDs, manual
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Wouters"
To: "George Barwood"
Cc: "IETF DNSOP WG"
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 10:34 PM
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] WGLC [2011-05-17]
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, George Barwood wrote:
>
>> (1) It's my belief that almost all Zones except for the root zone should
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, George Barwood wrote:
(1) It's my belief that almost all Zones except for the root zone should NOT
use a KSK/ZSK split.
With the signing of the root zone and many TLDs, manual distribution of trust
anchors is likely
to be uncommon.
Not true. Any responsible organisation
On 2011-04-18, at 15:01, George Barwood wrote:
> I have a few comments.
>
> (1) It's my belief that almost all Zones except for the root zone should NOT
> use a KSK/ZSK split.
In practice, for a TLD zone operator, rolling a KSK is a more complicated and
time-consuming process than rolling a Z
I have a few comments.
(1) It's my belief that almost all Zones except for the root zone should NOT
use a KSK/ZSK split.
With the signing of the root zone and many TLDs, manual distribution of trust
anchors is likely
to be uncommon. One advantage (not mentioned in the document) of using a single
Dear DNSOP WG,
this is to initiate a working group last call (WGLC) on
"DNSSEC Operational Practices, Version 2"
Owing to the length of the document, the WGLC will last for four weeks
instead of the usual two, and will therefore end on
Tuesday, 17 May, 23:59 U
