[dns-operations] .FI going insecure for two weeks (!)

[Erwin Lansing]

I have forwarded this thread to a contact at .fi and suggested they join the conversation and add some context.

My guess would also be that there is more than meets the eye, but hard to know for sure from the short note.

Erwin

> On 17 Dec 2024, at 21.51, Shumon Huque <shuque at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> We probably need to know some more details about what exactly is changing.
> Do we have any contacts at .FI that can provide them?
> 
> If they are not changing platforms and simply moving to a new algorithm,
> then yes, they should be able to do a regular algorithm rollover.
> 
> If they are also moving to a new provider/platform as part of the algorithm
> change, then the situation may be more complicated. They'd need to do
> an algorithm rollover and a multi-signer transition to not break the validation
> chain (with present protocol rules) -- and the involved parties would need to
> support the features needed to do that.
> 
> Shumon.
> 
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 3:16 PM Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com <mailto:steve at shinkuro.com>> wrote:
>> Why are they not doing a regular rollover so there is NO break in the verification chain?
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 3:10 PM Paul Wouters <paul at nohats.ca <mailto:paul at nohats.ca>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> .fi customers got a note with:
>>> 
>>>         Traficom changes the DNSSEC implementation used for .fi domain names by
>>>         changing the .FI signature algorithm. This change makes the domain name
>>>         system (DNS) more reliable and ensures the continued compatibility of
>>>         the DNSSEC implementation. Because of the change, .FI DS records will
>>>         be removed from the root zone. This will break the verification chain,
>>>         and DNSSEC will not be available to .fi domain names approximately from
>>>         17 April 2025 to 30 April 2025.
>>> 
>>> If anyone has some influence there and could perhaps convince them
>>> to reduce "weeks" to "hours", I think that would be a very healthy
>>> improvement of their process.
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dns-operations mailing list
>>> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net <mailto:dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net>
>>> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>   <https://wallet.unumid.co/authenticate?referralCode=tcp16fM4W47y>_______________________________________________
>> dns-operations mailing list
>> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net <mailto:dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net>
>> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
> _______________________________________________
> dns-operations mailing list
> dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
> https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20241217/de8bdbad/attachment.html>