[ksk-rollover] Courtesy advance notification: Announcing Draft Plan for Continuing With the Root KSK Roll

[Jacques Latour]

Hi Matt,

It was just a thought, there are no specific indicators other than a hunch as something to look at, if there’s 2 keys, pick the smallest one to validate…  Disregard if there’s nothing see here…   Just putting it out there.

Jacques

From: Matt Larson [mailto:matt.larson at icann.org]
Sent: February 5, 2018 10:19 AM
To: Jacques Latour <Jacques.Latour at cira.ca>
Cc: ksk-rollover at icann.org
Subject: Re: [ksk-rollover] Courtesy advance notification: Announcing Draft Plan for Continuing With the Root KSK Roll
Jacques,

On Feb 2, 2018, at 3:17 PM, Jacques Latour <jacques.latour at cira.ca<mailto:jacques.latour at cira.ca>> wrote:

Since we have a almost a year to wait, I’d like to propose ICANN publish a new KSK Key ID lower than current 19036 value and properly remove 20326.  Wondering if resolver behaviour would change if the ID was lower.

What indication do you have that the relationship of the key IDs would make any difference?

  Nothing to loose.

On the contrary, the amount of work to securely provision a new key, not to mention the messaging to explain it, is staggering.

Matt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ksk-rollover/attachments/20180205/44638622/attachment-0001.html>