[dns-operations] Problems resolving .gov using DLV
Edward Lewis
Ed.Lewis at neustar.biz
Wed Mar 18 14:15:02 UTC 2009
At 3:28 +0000 3/18/09, Paul Vixie wrote:
>it should be, but isn't. a separate "if alg is unknown treat as unsigned"
>test was needed in BIND for the DLV case, and it was not present.
I want to ask this of Paul/ISC, so I can explain the "root cause" of
the situation to interested parties.
The problem with .GOV resolution involving the DLV entry is limited
to a DS code path bug in certain versions of BIND. (Question:
"right?") Is this bug present in all BIND versions from 9.3 to 9.5
inclusive?
My reason for asking is that when it comes time to sign the TLDs I
work for, I don't want to cause any outages for my registrants.
(Okay, really, I don't want the registrants phoning in problems.) On
the one hand we want to progress security by adding DNSSEC but we
also don't want to disrupt the stability of the network by adding
DNSSEC. If it is the case that we get a help desk call from someone
saying "no one is getting to us" or "I can't get to them" I want to
at least arm my help desk folks with a script that says something
like: "is your DNS this kind of software? if so, inform them there
is a need to update it and/or alter an option."
BTW, this is something we ran into configuring one of our name
servers to be IPv6 only. We found quite a few folks out there
running "ancient-old" versions of software who were convinced to
upgrade instead of getting mad at us or "technical progress." ;)
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468
Getting everything you want is easy if you don't want much.
More information about the dns-operations
mailing list