- ripe-list - mailman.ripe.net

RIPE NCC service outage update, 17 December 2008
by Andrei Robachevsky 17 Dec '08

17 Dec '08

Dear Colleagues, Due to a loop problem in out layer 2 infrastructure starting from 11:20 UTC we experienced a high volume of traffic flooding the RIPE NCC network. That caused intermittent high packet loss and affected all our online services. The issue was resolved at 15:00 UTC. All services are back to normal. We apologise for the inconvenience. Best Regards, Andrei Robachevsky

1 0

Consensus on RIPE message to the NTIA on signing the root
by Rob Blokzijl 23 Nov '08

23 Nov '08

Dear Colleagues, we have received close to 40 responses to the proposed RIPE statement on signing the root. All of them were in favour of the statement, so we can safely conclude that we have consensus. The statement will therefore be submitted to the NTIA as the RIPE position on signing the root. Thanks to all who contributed in reaching this outcome. Regards, Rob Blokzijl

1 0

Call for Support: RIPE response to the US NTIA's NoI
by Peter Koch 21 Nov '08

21 Nov '08

Dear RIPE Community, as mentioned in my email sent on Monday, the DNS working group has come up with a response to the US NTIA's Notice of Inquiry (NoI) regarding the introduction of DNSSEC for the DNS root zone (for details see <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/DNS/DNSSEC.html>). The text below reflects the consensus of the DNS working group. As a follow up to our earlier efforts (see below), the DNS WG suggests that the response to the NTIA come from the broader RIPE community. So, this is the DNS WG's request for your support and endorsement of the proposal. Please read the text and voice your support or opposition. As mentioned earlier, we will have to meet an external deadline. Therefore, we are not looking for editorial suggestions. Regrettably, it is impractical to further refine or reword the text, since that would require more editing cycles and new consensus calls, which time won't permit. The WG chairs' collective and the RIPE Chair have agreed that it needs a binary decision on the proposal as presented here. It is possible that the text doesn't represent the optimum for everyone. Still, please consider whether you can support it as a community statement. In any case, the NoI is open for anybody, so you might want to send your individual response and/or contribute to other group efforts, as well. Clarifying questions are welcome, probably best asked on the DNS WG mailing list or to the DNS WG co-chairs <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/dns/index.html>. Given the 24 Nov deadline and to allow some time for the evalutaion of the list traffic, you are kindly asked to send your explicit statements to this list no later than Friday, 21 Nov 2008 12:00 UTC. Thanks in advance for your consideration! -Peter Koch [DNS WG co-chair] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- # # $Id: ntia-draft,v 1.9 2008/11/13 20:20:41 jim Exp $ # The RIPE community thanks the NTIA for its consultation on proposals to sign the root and is pleased to offer the following response to that consultation. We urge the adoption of a solution that leads to the prompt introduction of a signed root zone. Our community considers the introduction of a signed root zone to be an essential enabling step towards widespread deployment of Secure DNS, DNSSEC. This view is supported by the letter from the RIPE community to ICANN as an outcome of discussions at the May 2007 RIPE meeting in Tallinn: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/dns/icann-root-signing.pdf. It is to be expected that a community as diverse as RIPE cannot have a unified set of detailed answers to the NTIA questionnaire. However several members of the RIPE community will be individually responding to that questionnaire. We present the following statement as the consensus view of our community about the principles that should form the basis of the introduction of a signed DNS root. 1. Secure DNS, DNSSEC, is about data authenticity and integrity and not about control. 2. The introduction of DNSSEC to the root zone must be made in such a way that it is accepted as a global initiative. 3. Addition of DNSSEC to the root zone must be done in a way that does not compromise the security and stability of the Domain Name System. 4. When balancing the various concerns about signing the root zone, the approach must provide an appropriate level of trust and confidence by offering an optimally secure solution. 5. Deployment of a signed root should be done in a timely but not hasty manner. 6. Updates from TLD operators relating to DNSSEC should be aligned with the operational mechanisms for co-ordinating changes to the root zone. 7. If any procedural changes are introduced by the deployment of DNSSEC they should provide sufficient flexibility to allow for the roles and processes as well as the entities holding those roles to be changed after suitable consultations have taken place. 8. Policies and processes for signing the root zone must be transparent and trustworthy, making it straightforward for TLDs to supply keys and credentials so the delegations for those TLDs can benefit from a common DNSSEC trust anchor, the signed root. 9. There is no technical justification to create a new organisation to oversee the process of signing of the root. 10. No data should be moved between organisations without appropriate authenticity and integrity checking, particularly the flow of keying material between a TLD operator and the entity that signs the root. 11. The public part of the key signing key must be distributed as widely as possible. 12. The organisation that generates the root zone file must sign the file and therefore hold the private part of the zone signing key. 13. Changes to the entities and roles in the signing process must not necessarily require a change of keys. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

22 21

Re: Call for Support: RIPE response to the US NTIA's NoI
by Daniele Vannozzi 20 Nov '08

20 Nov '08

Dear Peter, I support this document. > # > # $Id: ntia-draft,v 1.9 2008/11/13 20:20:41 jim Exp $ > # Best regards, Daniele Vannozzi Registry ID: it.cnr

1 0

>>: [regional-russia] RIPE statement to NTIA - need your action - corrected]
by Natalya V Romashova 20 Nov '08

20 Nov '08

We agree with the RIPE letter and proposals on designing of signing the DNS root zone. We wait with impatience for DNSSEC testing activities. Best regards, Head of Operators' VAS department OAO "VimpelCom" Nataliya V. Romashova loc. 09 53395 tel. +7 495-961-31-86 #53395 tel. +7(495)743-01-70 fax. +7(495)985-95-55 e-mail: rom(a)beeline.ru Subject: Call for Support: RIPE response to the US NTIA's NoI From: Peter Koch <pk(a)DENIC.DE> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:59:09 +0100 To: ripe-list(a)ripe.net Dear RIPE Community, as mentioned in my email sent on Monday, the DNS working group has come up with a response to the US NTIA's Notice of Inquiry (NoI) regarding the introduction of DNSSEC for the DNS root zone (for details see <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/DNS/DNSSEC.html>). The text below reflects the consensus of the DNS working group. As a follow up to our earlier efforts (see below), the DNS WG suggests that the response to the NTIA come from the broader RIPE community. So, this is the DNS WG's request for your support and endorsement of the proposal. Please read the text and voice your support or opposition. As mentioned earlier, we will have to meet an external deadline. Therefore, we are not looking for editorial suggestions. Regrettably, it is impractical to further refine or reword the text, since that would require more editing cycles and new consensus calls, which time won't permit. The WG chairs' collective and the RIPE Chair have agreed that it needs a binary decision on the proposal as presented here. It is possible that the text doesn't represent the optimum for everyone. Still, please consider whether you can support it as a community statement. In any case, the NoI is open for anybody, so you might want to send your individual response and/or contribute to other group efforts, as well. Clarifying questions are welcome, probably best asked on the DNS WG mailing list or to the DNS WG co-chairs <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/dns/index.html>. Given the 24 Nov deadline and to allow some time for the evalutaion of the list traffic, you are kindly asked to send your explicit statements to this list no later than Friday, 21 Nov 2008 12:00 UTC. Thanks in advance for your consideration! -Peter Koch [DNS WG co-chair] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- # # $Id: ntia-draft,v 1.9 2008/11/13 20:20:41 jim Exp $ # The RIPE community thanks the NTIA for its consultation on proposals to sign the root and is pleased to offer the following response to that consultation. We urge the adoption of a solution that leads to the prompt introduction of a signed root zone. Our community considers the introduction of a signed root zone to be an essential enabling step towards widespread deployment of Secure DNS, DNSSEC. This view is supported by the letter from the RIPE community to ICANN as an outcome of discussions at the May 2007 RIPE meeting in Tallinn: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/dns/icann-root-signing.pdf. It is to be expected that a community as diverse as RIPE cannot have a unified set of detailed answers to the NTIA questionnaire. However several members of the RIPE community will be individually responding to that questionnaire. We present the following statement as the consensus view of our community about the principles that should form the basis of the introduction of a signed DNS root. 1. Secure DNS, DNSSEC, is about data authenticity and integrity and not about control. 2. The introduction of DNSSEC to the root zone must be made in such a way that it is accepted as a global initiative. 3. Addition of DNSSEC to the root zone must be done in a way that does not compromise the security and stability of the Domain Name System. 4. When balancing the various concerns about signing the root zone, the approach must provide an appropriate level of trust and confidence by offering an optimally secure solution. 5. Deployment of a signed root should be done in a timely but not hasty manner. 6. Updates from TLD operators relating to DNSSEC should be aligned with the operational mechanisms for co-ordinating changes to the root zone. 7. If any procedural changes are introduced by the deployment of DNSSEC they should provide sufficient flexibility to allow for the roles and processes as well as the entities holding those roles to be changed after suitable consultations have taken place. 8. Policies and processes for signing the root zone must be transparent and trustworthy, making it straightforward for TLDs to supply keys and credentials so the delegations for those TLDs can benefit from a common DNSSEC trust anchor, the signed root. 9. There is no technical justification to create a new organisation to oversee the process of signing of the root. 10. No data should be moved between organisations without appropriate authenticity and integrity checking, particularly the flow of keying material between a TLD operator and the entity that signs the root. 11. The public part of the key signing key must be distributed as widely as possible. 12. The organisation that generates the root zone file must sign the file and therefore hold the private part of the zone signing key. 13. Changes to the entities and roles in the signing process must not necessarily require a change of keys. -----------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Call for Support: RIPE response to the US NTIA's NoI
by Sergey Budnevitch 20 Nov '08

20 Nov '08

Peter, I, as a ru.mtu representative, support text of this response.

1 0

RE: [regional-russia] RIPE statement to NTIA - need your action - corrected
by "Kirill Samoylov" 19 Nov '08

19 Nov '08

I support RiPE WG's proposal of response to the US NTIA's Notice of Inquiry (NoI) regarding the introduction of DNSSEC for the DNS root zone. Kind regards, K. Samoylov

1 0

Re: Call for Support: RIPE response to the US NTIA's NoI
by sergey miassoedov 19 Nov '08

19 Nov '08

Dear Peter, I fully support this document. > # > # $Id: ntia-draft,v 1.9 2008/11/13 20:20:41 jim Exp $ > # -- Kind regards, sergey myasoedov

2 1

Survey on a "Technology Backdrop": please participate
by Mohsen Souissi 19 Nov '08

19 Nov '08

[Apologies for multiple copies due to mailing-lists overlapping] Dear all, Our R&D team at AFNIC (The French ccTLD Registry), with the help of its Scientific Council, is carrying out a survey on a "Technology backdrop" for AFNIC in a medium-to-long term (10-15 years). The main objective is to get a common view of the future (trends, uncertainties) when assessing R&D opportunities in the future. We believe that the outcome of this survey may be of interest to people answering it, as most questions sit indeed in a a quite wide technology perimeter/scope. Here's a short description of the context & goals of the survey: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This survey aims at helping AFNIC to develop a technology backdrop (i.e., a shared vision of technology evolution) in a medium-to-long term. Three axes have been chosen: "A. Global Internet Architecture", "B. Internet Naming, Identifiers and Digital Identities" and "C. User trends". : ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The survey is open from the 1st October to 31st of December 2008. Please feel free to participate: - "Canonical" URL: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=V0j_2fSEbCuIRb4EwwMPcyOA_3d_3d - "Tiny" URL: http://tinyurl.com/4xn2xc We commit to sharing the results with contributors who desire it (the survey includes a question to that effect). Looking forward to your contribution and thank you in advance for your time! Best Regards, Mohsen.

1 0

Call for Support: RIPE response to the US NTIA's NoI
by Vasily Dolmatov 18 Nov '08

18 Nov '08

I support this document. dol@ P.S. From the professional point of view I must note that 13th statement of this document can lead to some implications not obvious at the first glance, but nevertheless that does not change my support of document as a whole. ============================= Vasily Dolmatov Deputy Director Cryptocom Ltd.

1 0