<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: ETSI on Minimum Requirements for European ENUM Trials

A


    Richard> I dont like the two issues so closely linked.

Although the ENUM and DNSSEC protocols are orthogonal, the fact is
they will need to be joined at the hip before production ENUM services
can start.
We are going to have to agree to disagree here. I am not convinced of this at all and the suggestion continues to make me nervous.

 If we accept DNS spoofing would be very bad for ENUM and
telephony-like services in general, it follows that DNSSEC has to be
deployed to prevent those spoofing attacks. There's nothing else which
can solve that problem any time soon. That's why I strongly support
the inclusion of DNSSEC in trials. This stuff needs to be evaluated
so triallists can gain operational experience in handling signing
policies, key management and so on.
Inclusion in trials fine its just not the highest priority IMHO... hopefully a Phase 2 after some other things are cleared up first.

But again I completely resist the suggestion of a requirement for DNSSEC here or the suggestion or that the two are inexorably linked in a production environment. I'll let the "Gods of DNS" decide that issue when we can see some real trial results in a TLD.

This and discussions of DNAME ...



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166
Voice +1 571.434.5651 Cell : +1 314.503.0640, Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<
> or <
>
<http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<



<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>