You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
$TTL 1d
$INCLUDE Kexample.com.+008+18169.key
$INCLUDE Kexample.com.+008+57699.key
@ IN SOA ns.example.com. hostmaster.example.com. (
1 ; Serial
604800 ; Refresh
86400 ; Retry
2419200 ; Expire
604800 ) ; Negative Cache TTL
IN NS ns1.example.net.
sub IN NS ns1.example.net.
test.sub IN A 127.0.0.1
The error is that there exists the "test.sub" record but "sub" is
already delegated.
BIND "dnssec-signzone" ignores "test.sub" and does not create
RRSIG/NSEC/NSEC3 records.
When I verify the signed zone (using NSEC) with validns, no error is shown.
When I verify the signed zone (using NSEC3) with validns, the error:
"no corresponding NSEC3 found for test.sub.example.com." is shown which
is correct.
I'm not sure what's the right way of handling this error is. In any
case, I think the error message should be the same whether NSEC or NSEC3
is used. Practically, I could live with a WARNING and not an ERROR
because, as far as BIND dnssec-signzone goes, the additional record of
the delegated zone is not signed, so does not lead to a signing error.
However, I'm not sure if other DNSSEC signing tools handle this the same
way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
An acceptable way of reporting this would be to report an "Unused glue
record" or a "Record from a delegated zone", optionally, activated via yet
another policy check. Do you concur?
The only thing I need to check is what dnssec-signzone does for/what RFCs
say about real glue records such as
Via Daniel Stirnimann:
The error is that there exists the "test.sub" record but "sub" is
already delegated.
BIND "dnssec-signzone" ignores "test.sub" and does not create
RRSIG/NSEC/NSEC3 records.
When I verify the signed zone (using NSEC) with validns, no error is shown.
When I verify the signed zone (using NSEC3) with validns, the error:
"no corresponding NSEC3 found for test.sub.example.com." is shown which
is correct.
I'm not sure what's the right way of handling this error is. In any
case, I think the error message should be the same whether NSEC or NSEC3
is used. Practically, I could live with a WARNING and not an ERROR
because, as far as BIND dnssec-signzone goes, the additional record of
the delegated zone is not signed, so does not lead to a signing error.
However, I'm not sure if other DNSSEC signing tools handle this the same
way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: