[ksk-rollover] Thoughts on future KSK Rolls

Michael Richardson mcr+ietf at sandelman.ca
Sat Mar 30 16:30:23 UTC 2019

Tim April <timapril at gmail.com> wrote:
    > The rotation period of five years, in my opinion, is far too long and
    > can result in operators and developers becoming complacent, or being
    > generally unaware, that keys rolls happen. My current opinion is that
    > the rotation period should be roughly once a year. The yearly cadence
    > would allow the key to be somewhat stable but also have the key rolls
    > be a regular event that can be predicted while not falling too far out
    > of working memory.

I understood that there was some root zone maintenance times that meant that
changes had to happen on the 11th or something of Jan/May/July/Sept, or some
such.    Otherwise, I like the concept of your schedule.  
It's a bit US centric in terms of bank holidays, etc, but I'm sure that the
exact exclusion list (as you suggest) can worked out.

    > The current steady state of the KSK has one valid KSK. To this point,
    > this has not been a problem, but this also means that if an emergency
    > keyroll is required, the current tooling / support will not help with a
    > roll. A potential way to support an emergency key roll, should one be
    > needed, would be to have a backup key created and staged in the root
    > zone.

I think that this is an important thing to consider, but I think that we need
to think more about what kinds of emergencies it deals with, and which kind
still cause a failure.

Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF at sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 487 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ksk-rollover/attachments/20190330/beedb78b/signature.asc>

More information about the ksk-rollover mailing list