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] on behalf of [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]>>:
>> 
>>     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]>>
>>     > 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]> on behalf of
>>     >>> [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>
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>
>-- 
>Niels ten Oever
>Head of Digital
>
>Article 19
>www.article19.org
>
>PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
>                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9