Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Update DNSESEC05 on legal values #763

Closed
matsduf opened this issue May 13, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Update DNSESEC05 on legal values #763

matsduf opened this issue May 13, 2019 · 5 comments
Assignees
@matsduf
Labels
P-High Priority: Issue to be solved before other
Milestone
v2019.2

Comments

@matsduf
Copy link
Contributor

matsduf commented May 13, 2019 •
edited

When draft-ietf-dnsop-algorithm-update has been accepted as RFC then DNSSEC05 specification must be updated.

Also see https://indico.dns-oarc.net/event/31/contributions/688/attachments/650/1067/matthijs-mekking-oarc30-unsupported-algorithms.pdf

Solution in #777.
@matsduf matsduf added this to the v2019.2 milestone May 29, 2019
@matsduf matsduf self-assigned this May 29, 2019
@matsduf
Copy link
Contributor Author

matsduf commented May 29, 2019

The created PR must not be merged before the RFC is ready.

@pawal
Copy link
Contributor

pawal commented May 29, 2019 •
edited

I don't see any reason at all to update DNSSEC05, the specification already refers to the IANA registry of DNSSEC Algorithm Numbers - and this registry is being effected by the acceptance of the mentioned draft.

@matsduf
Copy link
Contributor Author

matsduf commented May 29, 2019

@pawal, if you take a look at the specification you will see why it must be updated.

https://github.com/zonemaster/zonemaster/blob/master/docs/specifications/tests/DNSSEC-TP/dnssec05.md

matsduf added a commit to matsduf/zonemaster that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2019
@matsduf
Updated DNSSEC05 to solve issue zonemaster#763.
b0d5a9d 
* Meet specification in new RFC 8624 with more strict requirements.
* Decreased wordiness.
* Increased default level for several messages.
* Message ALGORITHM_DELETE_DS has been removed (algorithm handled
  as ALGORITHM_NOT_ZONE_SIGN).
* Message ALGORITHM_INDIRECT_KEY has been removed (algorithm handled
  as ALGORITHM_RESERVED).
* Some editorial updates.
matsduf added a commit to matsduf/zonemaster that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2019
@matsduf
Updated DNSSEC05 to solve issue zonemaster#763.
d6924c8 
* Meet specification in new RFC 8624 with more strict requirements.
* Decreased wordiness.
* Increased default level for several messages.
* Message ALGORITHM_DELETE_DS has been removed (algorithm handled
  as ALGORITHM_NOT_ZONE_SIGN).
* Message ALGORITHM_INDIRECT_KEY has been removed (algorithm handled
  as ALGORITHM_RESERVED).
* Message ALGORITHM_NOT_RECOMMENDED has been added.
* Some editorial updates.
@matsduf matsduf mentioned this issue Jun 12, 2019
Merged
@sandoche2k sandoche2k added the P-High Priority: Issue to be solved before other label Jun 19, 2019
@sandoche2k
Copy link
Contributor

Should we follow the RFC or the IANA registry? If there is a new RFC the IANA registry will be updated isn't it?

@matsduf matsduf mentioned this issue Jun 24, 2019
Closed
matsduf added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 25, 2019
@matsduf
Updated DNSSEC05 (#777)
75b0923 
Updated DNSSEC05 to solve issue #763.

* Meet specification in new RFC 8624 with more strict requirements.
* Decreased wordiness.
* Increased default level for several messages.
* Message ALGORITHM_DELETE_DS has been removed (algorithm handled
  as ALGORITHM_NOT_ZONE_SIGN).
* Message ALGORITHM_INDIRECT_KEY has been removed (algorithm handled
  as ALGORITHM_NOT_ZONE_SIGN).
* Message ALGORITHM_NOT_RECOMMENDED has been added.
* Some editorial updates.
@matsduf
Copy link
Contributor Author

matsduf commented Jun 28, 2019

Resolved by #777.

@matsduf matsduf closed this as completed Jun 28, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@matsduf matsduf

Labels
P-High Priority: Issue to be solved before other
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v2019.2
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@pawal @matsduf @sandoche2k