The real problem isn't signing or resigning zones, or even successfully=20 completing the original configuration (although those are not trivial for=20 the average person trying to setup their own dns). It's the trust=20 anchors. Until the root is signed, trust anchors are a PITA. And until=20 the root is signed, why should anyone believe that DNSSEC will achieve=20 wide adoption?Well there are a number of ccTLD's that are already signed. RIPE sign their part of the reverse space. ORG is in the process of getting signed. It's happening. There are existing solutions to dealing with lack of support in the infrastructure zones (includes the root). You let someone you trust collect the trust anchors for you then incorporate them on a regular basis. We effectively do this everyday with https but for some reason people are scared to do the same thing with dns despite private parts of the keys never being available to the entity doing the certification. With https the certifying authority can spoof any site they certify.
Perhaps that's because a cert problem on a web server breaks a single webserver. A cert problem with dns breaks an entire domain.
Paul Schmehl If it isn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer.
Attachment:
p7sPkGYu8nVu9.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/