This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[dns-wg] NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
David Conrad
drc at virtualized.org
Tue Oct 21 18:30:24 CEST 2008
Hi, On Oct 21, 2008, at 4:43 AM, B C wrote: > However one point that I would strongly support from the Verisign > proposal is the multi user stewardship of the KSK (the M of N > principle) Just to be clear, the KSK signing ceremony is something that happens rarely, e.g. O(years). Given the importance of the event, it would seem to me that it would be appropriate for attendance of all observers/participants to be mandatory (if someone isn't able to come for whatever reason, e.g., they've disappeared, that person/entity's role should be reassigned prior to the ceremony). As such, M of N would imply that you could have non-unanimity in the creation of the KSK. This strikes me as a really questionable situation to get into. Given the relative rarity of the KSK generation event, I am unclear as to why the added complexity of M of N is beneficial. Could someone explain? Thanks, -drc
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] NTIA NoI: does anyone care?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]