Skip to main content

Redefinition of DNS Authenticated Data (AD) bit
RFC 3655

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2017-05-16
06 (System) Changed document authors from "Brian Wellington" to "Brian Wellington, Ólafur Guðmundsson"
2015-10-14
06 (System) Notify list changed from ,  to
2003-11-17
06 Thomas Narten [Note]: 'published as RFC 3655' added by Thomas Narten
2003-11-17
06 Thomas Narten published as RFC 3655
2003-11-05
06 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza
2003-11-05
06 (System) RFC published
2003-08-15
06 Natalia Syracuse State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Natalia Syracuse
2003-08-13
06 Michael Lee IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2003-08-13
06 Michael Lee IESG has approved the document
2003-08-13
06 Michael Lee Closed "Approve" ballot
2003-07-16
06 Michael Lee State Changes to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent  :: Point Raised - writeup needed by Lee, Michael
2003-07-10
06 Amy Vezza State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent  :: Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation by Vezza, Amy
2003-07-03
06 Erik Nordmark State Changes to IESG Evaluation from AD Evaluation by Nordmark, Erik
2003-07-03
06 Erik Nordmark State Changes to AD Evaluation from IESG Evaluation  :: AD Followup by Nordmark, Erik
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alex Zinin
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bill Fenner
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ned Freed
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Steven Bellovin
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Thomas Narten
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] Position for Allison Mankin has been changed to Discuss from No Record
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] Position for Randy Bush has been changed to Discuss from No Record
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Harald Alvestrand
2003-06-17
06 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Erik Nordmark
2003-06-17
06 Allison Mankin
[Ballot discuss]
The final paragraph of the Security Considerations is written
in a way that obscures meaning, in contrast to the related
final paragraph of …
[Ballot discuss]
The final paragraph of the Security Considerations is written
in a way that obscures meaning, in contrast to the related
final paragraph of Section 3.

> Resolvers (full or stub) that blindly trust the AD bit without
>    knowing the security policy of the server generating the answer can
>    not be considered security aware.


A better version would be "that blindly trust the AD bit MUST
be used only in an environment in which configurations ensure
that the security policy of the server is  appropriate to
the AD bit's information being valid for a decision on whether
to use the information it applies to"

Perhaps rather than obscuring meaning, it is actually wrong.
But the above hasty attempt tried to express something less
wrong.
2003-06-17
06 (System) Ballot has been issued
2003-06-17
06 Randy Bush
[Ballot discuss]
this 'discuss' is meant literally. i just think that there are
some issues here worth discussing.

the major issue here is that having …
[Ballot discuss]
this 'discuss' is meant literally. i just think that there are
some issues here worth discussing.

the major issue here is that having a remote, often untrusted, server
assert (often over an untrusted channel) that the data met its local
policies is not overly useful and is possibly misleading. the counter
is that the stub client may have a trust relationship, via tsig or
whatever, with the server, which also provides a trustable channel.

on the other hand, this is no worse, and arguably better than the
current definition of the AD bit. this then devolves into the
question of whether it is better to improve a weak assertion or to
recover the bit and reserve it for future use.

who is going to use this assertion? is it thought that application
layers will learn the trust state of the dns data which they use?

and then, there is the exciting question of what this means in the
presense of the dreaded opt-in. the client can not tell if the server
which set the AD bit is locally configured to like opted-out data.
2003-06-17
06 Randy Bush Created "Approve" ballot
2003-06-17
06 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2003-06-17
06 (System) Last call text was added
2003-06-17
06 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2002-09-25
06 Erik Nordmark responsible has been changed to IESG member from Working Group
2002-09-25
06 Erik Nordmark State Changes to IESG Evaluation  -- Evaluation of Result from AD Evaluation  -- External Party by nordmark
2002-09-25
06 Erik Nordmark Need to review if 06 satisfies the comments from the IESG.
2002-09-25
06 Erik Nordmark A new comment added
by nordmark
2002-09-25
06 Erik Nordmark responsible has been changed to Working Group from IETF Secretary
2002-06-28
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-06.txt
2002-06-05
06 Erik Nordmark Waiting for 24 hours to get IESG comments gathered before sending to the WG.
2002-06-05
06 Erik Nordmark Due date has been changed to 06/06/2002 from 05/21/2002
A new comment added
by nordmark
2002-06-05
06 Erik Nordmark
State Changes to New Version Needed (WG/Author)                    from Ready for Telechat            …
State Changes to New Version Needed (WG/Author)                    from Ready for Telechat                                by nordmark
2002-05-24
06 Stephen Coya
State Changes to Ready for Telechat                                from Last Call Issued  …
State Changes to Ready for Telechat                                from Last Call Issued                                  by scoya
2002-05-16
06 Stephen Coya Due date has been changed to 05/21/2002 from
by scoya
2002-05-15
06 Jacqueline Hargest
State Changes to Last Call Issued                                  from Last Call …
State Changes to Last Call Issued                                  from Last Call Requested                              by jhargest
2002-05-07
06 Erik Nordmark responsible has been changed to IETF Secretary from Responsible AD
2002-05-07
06 Erik Nordmark
State Changes to Last Call Requested                              from AD Evaluation      …
State Changes to Last Call Requested                              from AD Evaluation                                    by nordmark
2002-05-07
06 (System) Last call sent
2002-03-28
06 Erik Nordmark Intended Status has been changed to Proposed Standard from None
2002-03-28
06 Erik Nordmark
State Changes to AD Evaluation                                    from Pre AD …
State Changes to AD Evaluation                                    from Pre AD Evaluation                                by Erik Nordmark
2002-03-28
06 Erik Nordmark Draft Added by Erik Nordmark
2002-03-26
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-05.txt
2002-02-15
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-04.txt
2001-07-19
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-03.txt
2001-06-21
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-02.txt
2001-01-22
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-01.txt
2000-11-21
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-00.txt