NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Niels ten Oever <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Niels ten Oever <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 27 May 2016 15:08:54 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (311 lines)
I don't think we need a training session, but the registrars and hosting
providers :)

On 05/27/2016 03:05 PM, farzaneh badii wrote:
> We can invite Patrik Falstrom and have a training session. 
> 
> On 27 May 2016 at 14:56, James Gannon <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> 
>     I like that idea. Lets try and gather some info before Helsinki and
>     see if this is something we need to put time into and where our time
>     is best spent.
> 
>     -jg
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     On 27/05/2016, 13:55, "Niels ten Oever" <[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> 
>     >Perhaps we can reach out to Michele and see where this is on their
>     >agenda? Shall I do so? Do other people share this concern?
>     >
>     >Cheers,
>     >
>     >Niels
>     >
>     >On 05/27/2016 02:38 PM, James Gannon wrote:
>     >> Agreed, so do I see you volunteering to lead this effort? =)
>     >> Happy to assist/help out where I can!
>     >>
>     >> -JG
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On 27/05/2016, 12:46, "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of Niels ten Oever"
>     <[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]> on behalf of
>     [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>> Hi Rafik,
>     >>>
>     >>> The DNSSEC for Everybody is great and fun, but it's more a very
>     rough
>     >>> 101. The DNSSEC workshop is also great, but it doesn't help you
>     when you
>     >>> are behind a production terminal. Good documentation is needed.
>     Or we
>     >>> need to find out better why adoption levels are so low.
>     >>>
>     >>> Is this something we can bring up?
>     >>>
>     >>> I think this is especially an issue for the NCSG because NGO's,
>     >>> activists and individual users will greatly benefit from increased
>     >>> trust, and more protection against DNS poisoining. With the enormous
>     >>> success of Let's Encrypt (1 milltion certs distributed, covering
>     >2.5
>     >>> million domains) DNSSEC is the next logical step, and adoption
>     is still
>     >>> _very_ low.
>     >>>
>     >>> Cheers,
>     >>>
>     >>> Niels
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> On 05/27/2016 01:34 PM, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>     >>>> Hi Niels,
>     >>>>
>     >>>> ICANN organizes regularly for many years now in each ICANN
>     meeting 2
>     >>>> DNSSec sessions related:
>     >>>>
>     >>>>   * DNSSEC Workshop
>     >>>>   * DNSSEC for Everybody: A Beginner's Guide
>     >>>>
>     >>>> there are also also DNSSec session during conferences like African
>     >>>> Internet Summit
>     (https://internetsummitafrica.org/programme/agenda),
>     >>>> https://nsrc.org/workshops/2013/nsrc-ati-tn-dnssec/ or  ICANN
>     DNS forum
>     >>>> . my understanding is that ICANN tech team helped some ccTLD
>     >>>> operators http://dnssec-africa.org/
>     >>>>
>     >>>> I don't think there are specific activities toward registrars
>     per se.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Best,
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Rafik
>     >>>>
>     >>>> 2016-05-27 20:21 GMT+09:00 Niels ten Oever
>     <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>     >>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>>:
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     Hi James,
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     On 05/26/2016 12:12 PM, James Gannon wrote:
>     >>>>     > No sorry what are the specific issues, i.e. In
>     understanding the KSK
>     >>>>     > and ZSK keys, in documentation etc? Do DNS engineers at
>     hosting
>     >>>>     > companies really not understand it?
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     > Because there is a large amount of documentation out
>     there for
>     >>>>     > example on configuring DNSSEC in Bind and while yes
>     deploying at
>     >>>>     > scale is a risk that registrars would need to analysise
>     and take an
>     >>>>     > internal risk position on Im not sure I understand the
>     ‘even the most
>     >>>>     > experienced engineers don’t understand it’ part of the
>     question.
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     > The rest I do for sure, adoption of DNSSEC is a big
>     topic, but there
>     >>>>     > is huge amount son work going on in both ICANN and ISOC
>     supporting
>     >>>>     > registrars who wish to move down that path in a stable
>     and secure
>     >>>>     > path. ISOC has documentation specifically targeting at
>     registrars
>     >>>>     >
>     http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/resources/dnssec-registrars/
>     >>>>     > I know the RrSG has done some work for ones that are
>     involved in
>     >>>>     > that, there is also Deplay360 from ISOC
>     >>>>     > http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/dnssec/ and a lot of
>     >>>>     > community support behind it from a technical perspective
>     for those
>     >>>>     > interested.
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     Have been clicking through the ISOC site, but I cannot find
>     a proper
>     >>>>     how-to or documentation for an indepdendent registrar anywhere.
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     I think we should push harder for DNSSEC adoption, and
>     ICANN can and
>     >>>>     should play a role in this imho, why would it be more of an
>     ISOC task
>     >>>>     than a ICANN task?
>     >>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     > My question would be what is the thing that needs to be
>     done to
>     >>>>     > promote adoption, and from what I have seen so far its
>     usually risk
>     >>>>     > aversion on the business side, and that’s not something
>     that we can
>     >>>>     > do much about from the ICANN side of things, something I
>     feel ISOC
>     >>>>     > should focus on more tho.
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     Business aversion is also because it's hard, and thus will
>     cost more
>     >>>>     time. Also: more risk because it might break. This does not
>     balance well
>     >>>>     with the increased trust gained with DNSSEC. We can help
>     tip this scale
>     >>>>     by making implementation easier through good documentation,
>     no? Looks
>     >>>>     like an ICANN task par excellence to me!
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     Cheers,
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     Niels
>     >>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     > -J
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     > On 26/05/2016, 11:03, "Niels ten Oever"
>     >>>>     <[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>>
>     >>>>     > wrote:
>     >>>>     >
>     >>>>     >> Do you mean you would like to hear names of registrars
>     that are
>     >>>>     >> not offering DNSSEC ? Am afraid it is the majority of
>     the SME
>     >>>>     >> registrars / hosting providers.
>     >>>>     >>
>     >>>>     >> Cheers,
>     >>>>     >>
>     >>>>     >> Niels
>     >>>>     >>
>     >>>>     >> On 05/26/2016 11:57 AM, James Gannon wrote:
>     >>>>     >>> Have you got any specific examples?
>     >>>>     >>>
>     >>>>     >>>
>     >>>>     >>>
>     >>>>     >>>
>     >>>>     >>> On 26/05/2016, 10:50, "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of Niels
>     ten Oever"
>     >>>>     >>> <[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>     >>>>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of
>     >>>>     >>> [log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>     >>>>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote:
>     >>>>     >>>
>     >>>>     >>>> Hi all,
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> I have been talking to several registrars (especially
>     smaller
>     >>>>     >>>> ones that provide a lot of support to NGOs), that do not
>     >>>>     >>>> provide DNSSEC yet as part of their service.
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> The story that I keep on hearing is that even the most
>     >>>>     >>>> experienced engineers have issues with understanding the
>     >>>>     >>>> configuration of the KSK and Zone signing keys and the key
>     >>>>     >>>> rollover, inconsistencies in documentation and
>     therefore lack
>     >>>>     >>>> of adoption, because in case of a mistake this might
>     seriously
>     >>>>     >>>> impact the production environment.
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> I think the adoption of DNSSEC is an issue we should
>     care about
>     >>>>     >>>> because it has the potential to radically increase
>     trust in the
>     >>>>     >>>> DNS system.
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> Is this an issue you all recognize, and do you know
>     how / if
>     >>>>     >>>> ICANN makes (or can make) this easier?
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> Best,
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> Niels
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> Article 19 www.article19.org
>     <http://www.article19.org> <http://www.article19.org>
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5
>     A0F2 636D
>     >>>>     >>>> 68E9
>     >>>>     >>>>
>     >>>>     >>
>     >>>>     >> -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
>     >>>>     >>
>     >>>>     >> Article 19 www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>     <http://www.article19.org>
>     >>>>     >>
>     >>>>     >> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5
>     A0F2 636D
>     >>>>     >> 68E9
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     --
>     >>>>     Niels ten Oever
>     >>>>     Head of Digital
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     Article 19
>     >>>>     www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>     <http://www.article19.org>
>     >>>>
>     >>>>     PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>     >>>>                        678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>     >>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> Niels ten Oever
>     >>> Head of Digital
>     >>>
>     >>> Article 19
>     >>> www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>     >>>
>     >>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>     >>>                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
>     >
>     >--
>     >Niels ten Oever
>     >Head of Digital
>     >
>     >Article 19
>     >www.article19.org <http://www.article19.org>
>     >
>     >PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>     >                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Farzaneh

-- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

ATOM RSS1 RSS2