1849 lines
70 KiB
Plaintext
1849 lines
70 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
|
||
Internet Engineering Task Force S. Morris
|
||
Internet-Draft ISC
|
||
Intended status: Informational J. Ihren
|
||
Expires: September 11, 2011 Netnod
|
||
J. Dickinson
|
||
Sinodun
|
||
March 10, 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations
|
||
draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-02.txt
|
||
|
||
Abstract
|
||
|
||
This document describes the issues surrounding the timing of events
|
||
in the rolling of a key in a DNSSEC-secured zone. It presents
|
||
timelines for the key rollover and explicitly identifies the
|
||
relationships between the various parameters affecting the process.
|
||
|
||
Status of this Memo
|
||
|
||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
|
||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
|
||
|
||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
|
||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
|
||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
|
||
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
|
||
|
||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
|
||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
|
||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
|
||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
|
||
|
||
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 11, 2011.
|
||
|
||
Copyright Notice
|
||
|
||
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
|
||
document authors. All rights reserved.
|
||
|
||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
|
||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
|
||
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
|
||
publication of this document. Please review these documents
|
||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
|
||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
|
||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 1]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
|
||
described in the Simplified BSD License.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
|
||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
|
||
1.1. Key Rolling Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
|
||
1.2. Types of Keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||
1.3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||
1.4. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||
2. Rollover Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||
2.1. ZSK Rollovers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
|
||
2.2. KSK Rollovers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
|
||
2.3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
|
||
3. Key Rollover Timelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
|
||
3.1. Key States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
|
||
3.2. Zone-Signing Key Timelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||
3.2.1. Pre-Publication Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
|
||
3.2.2. Double-Signature Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
|
||
3.2.3. Double-RRSIG Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
|
||
3.3. Key-Signing Key Rollover Timelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
|
||
3.3.1. Double-Signature Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
|
||
3.3.2. Double-DS Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
|
||
3.3.3. Double-RRset Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
|
||
3.3.4. Interaction with Configured Trust Anchors . . . . . . 23
|
||
3.3.4.1. Addition of KSK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
|
||
3.3.4.2. Removal of KSK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
|
||
3.3.5. Introduction of First KSK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
|
||
4. Standby Keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
|
||
5. Algorithm Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
|
||
6. Limitation of Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
|
||
7. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
|
||
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
|
||
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
|
||
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
|
||
11. Change History (To be removed on publication) . . . . . . . . 27
|
||
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
|
||
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
|
||
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
|
||
Appendix A. List of Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
|
||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 2]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
1. Introduction
|
||
|
||
1.1. Key Rolling Considerations
|
||
|
||
When a zone is secured with DNSSEC, the zone manager must be prepared
|
||
to replace ("roll") the keys used in the signing process. The
|
||
rolling of keys may be caused by compromise of one or more of the
|
||
existing keys, or it may be due to a management policy that demands
|
||
periodic key replacement for security or operational reasons. In
|
||
order to implement a key rollover, the keys need to be introduced
|
||
into and removed from the zone at the appropriate times.
|
||
Considerations that must be taken into account are:
|
||
|
||
o DNSKEY records and associated information (such as the associated
|
||
DS records or RRSIG records created with the key) are not only
|
||
held at the authoritative nameserver, they are also cached by
|
||
resolvers. The data on these systems can be interlinked, e.g. a
|
||
validating resolver may try to validate a signature retrieved from
|
||
a cache with a key obtained separately.
|
||
|
||
o Zone "boot-strapping" events, where a zone is signed for the first
|
||
time, can be common in configurations where a large number of
|
||
zones are being served. Procedures should be able to cope with
|
||
the introduction of keys into the zone for the first time as well
|
||
as "steady-state", where the records are being replaced as part of
|
||
normal zone maintenance.
|
||
|
||
o To allow for an emergency re-signing of the zone as soon as
|
||
possible after a key compromise has been detected, standby keys
|
||
(additional keys over and above those used to sign the zone) need
|
||
to be present.
|
||
|
||
o A query for the DNSKEY RRset returns all DNSKEY records in the
|
||
zone. As there is limited space in the UDP packet (even with
|
||
EDNS0 support), key records no longer needed must be periodically
|
||
removed. (For the same reason, the number of standby keys in the
|
||
zone should be restricted to the minimum required to support the
|
||
key management policy.)
|
||
|
||
Management policy, e.g. how long a key is used for, also needs to be
|
||
considered. However, the point of key management logic is not to
|
||
ensure that a rollover is completed at a certain time but rather to
|
||
ensure that no changes are made to the state of keys published in the
|
||
zone until it is "safe" to do so ("safe" in this context meaning that
|
||
at no time during the rollover process does any part of the zone ever
|
||
go bogus). In other words, although key management logic enforces
|
||
policy, it may not enforce it strictly.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 3]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
1.2. Types of Keys
|
||
|
||
Although DNSSEC validation treats all keys equally, [RFC4033]
|
||
recognises the broad classification of zone-signing keys (ZSK) and
|
||
key-signing keys (KSK). A ZSK is used to authenticate information
|
||
within the zone; a KSK is used to authenticate the zone's DNSKEY
|
||
RRset. The main implication for this distinction concerns the
|
||
consistency of information during a rollover.
|
||
|
||
During operation, a validating resolver must use separate pieces of
|
||
information to perform an authentication. At the time of
|
||
authentication, each piece of information may be in its cache or may
|
||
need to be retrieved from the authoritative server. The rollover
|
||
process needs to happen in such a way that at all times during the
|
||
rollover the information is consistent. With a ZSK, the information
|
||
is the RRSIG (plus associated RRset) and the DNSKEY. These are both
|
||
obtained from the same zone. In the case of the KSK, the information
|
||
is the DNSKEY and DS RRset with the latter being obtained from a
|
||
different zone.
|
||
|
||
Although there are similarities in the algorithms to roll ZSKs and
|
||
KSKs, there are a number of differences. For this reason, the two
|
||
types of rollovers are described separately. It is also possible to
|
||
use a single key as both the ZSK and KSK. However, the rolling of
|
||
this type of key is not treated in this document.
|
||
|
||
1.3. Terminology
|
||
|
||
The terminology used in this document is as defined in [RFC4033] and
|
||
[RFC5011].
|
||
|
||
A number of symbols are used to identify times, intervals, etc. All
|
||
are listed in Appendix A.
|
||
|
||
1.4. Requirements Language
|
||
|
||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
||
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
|
||
|
||
|
||
2. Rollover Methods
|
||
|
||
2.1. ZSK Rollovers
|
||
|
||
A ZSK can be rolled in one of three ways:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 4]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
o Pre-Publication: described in [RFC4641], the new key is introduced
|
||
into the DNSKEY RRset which is then re-signed. This state of
|
||
affairs remains in place for long enough to ensure that any cached
|
||
DNSKEY RRsets contain both keys. At that point signatures created
|
||
with the old key can be replaced by those created with the new
|
||
key, and the old signatures removed. During the re-signing
|
||
process (which may or may not be atomic depending on how the zone
|
||
is managed), it doesn't matter which key an RRSIG record retrieved
|
||
by a resolver was created with; cached copies of the DNSKEY RRset
|
||
will contain both the old and new keys.
|
||
|
||
Once the zone contains only signatures created with the new key,
|
||
there is an interval during which RRSIG records created with the
|
||
old key expire from caches. After this, there will be no
|
||
signatures anywhere that were created using the old key, and it
|
||
can can be removed from the DNSKEY RRset.
|
||
|
||
o Double-Signature: also mentioned in [RFC4641], this involves
|
||
introducing the new key into the zone and using it to create
|
||
additional RRSIG records; the old key and existing RRSIG records
|
||
are retained. During the period in which the zone is being signed
|
||
(again, the signing process may not be atomic), validating
|
||
resolvers are always able to validate RRSIGs: any combination of
|
||
old and new DNSKEY RRset and RRSIG allows at least one signature
|
||
to be validated.
|
||
|
||
Once the signing process is complete and enough time has elapsed
|
||
to allow all old information to expire from caches, the old key
|
||
and signatures can be removed from the zone. As before, during
|
||
this period any combination of DNSKEY RRset and RRSIG will allow
|
||
validation of at least one signature.
|
||
|
||
o Double-RRSIG: strictly speaking, the use of the term "Double-
|
||
Signature" above is a misnomer as the method is not only double
|
||
signature, it is also double key as well. A true Double-Signature
|
||
method (here called the Double-RRSIG method) involves introducing
|
||
new signatures in the zone (while still retaining the old ones)
|
||
but not introducing the new key.
|
||
|
||
Once the signing process is complete and enough time has elapsed
|
||
to ensure that all caches that may contain an RR and associated
|
||
RRSIG have a copy of both signatures, the key is changed. After a
|
||
further interval during which the old DNSKEY RRset expires from
|
||
caches, the old signatures are removed from the zone.
|
||
|
||
Of three methods, Double-Signature is conceptually the simplest -
|
||
introduce the new key and new signatures, then approximately one TTL
|
||
later remove the old key and old signatures. Pre-Publication is more
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 5]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
complex - introduce the new key, approximately one TTL later sign the
|
||
records, and approximately one TTL after that remove the old key.
|
||
Double-RRSIG is essentially the reverse of Pre-Publication -
|
||
introduce the new signatures, approximately one TTL later change the
|
||
key, and approximately one TTL after that remove the old signatures.
|
||
|
||
2.2. KSK Rollovers
|
||
|
||
For ZSKs, the issue for the validating resolver is to ensure that it
|
||
has access to the ZSK that corresponds to a particular signature. In
|
||
the KSK case this can never be a problem as the KSK is only used for
|
||
one signature (that over the DNSKEY RRset) and both the key the
|
||
signature travel together. Instead, the issue is to ensure that the
|
||
KSK is trusted.
|
||
|
||
Trust in the KSK is either due to the existence of a DS record in the
|
||
parent zone (which is itself trusted) or an explicitly configured
|
||
trust anchor. If the former, the rollover algorithm will need to
|
||
involve the parent zone in the addition and removal of DS records, so
|
||
timings are not wholly under the control of the zone manager. If the
|
||
latter, [RFC5011] timings will be needed to roll the keys. (Even in
|
||
the case where authentication is via a DS record, the zone manager
|
||
may elect to include [RFC5011] timings in the key rolling process so
|
||
as to cope with the possibility that the key has also been explicitly
|
||
configured as a trust anchor.)
|
||
|
||
It is important to note that this does not preclude the development
|
||
of key rollover logic; in accordance with the goal of the rollover
|
||
logic being able to determine when a state change is "safe", the only
|
||
effect of being dependent on the parent is that there may be a period
|
||
of waiting for the parent to respond in addition to any delay the key
|
||
rollover logic requires. Although this introduces additional delays,
|
||
even with a parent that is less than ideally responsive the only
|
||
effect will be a slowdown in the rollover state transitions. This
|
||
may cause a policy violation, but will not cause any operational
|
||
problems.
|
||
|
||
Like the ZSK case, there are three methods for rolling a KSK:
|
||
|
||
o Double-Signature: also known as Double-DNSKEY, the new KSK is
|
||
added to the DNSKEY RRset which is then signed with both the old
|
||
and new key. After waiting for the old RRset to expire from
|
||
caches, the DS record in the parent zone is changed. After
|
||
waiting a further interval for this change to be reflected in
|
||
caches, the old key is removed from the RRset. (The name "Double-
|
||
Signature" is used because, like the ZSK method of the same name,
|
||
the new key is introduced and immediately used for signing.)
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 6]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
o Double-DS: the new DS record is published. After waiting for this
|
||
change to propagate into caches, the KSK is changed. After a
|
||
further interval during which the old DNSKEY RRset expires from
|
||
caches, the old DS record is removed.
|
||
|
||
o Double-RRset: the new KSK is added to the DNSKEY RRset which is
|
||
then signed with both the old and new key, and the new DS record
|
||
added to the parent zone. After waiting a suitable interval for
|
||
the old DS and DNSKEY RRsets to expire from caches, the old DNSKEY
|
||
and DS record are removed.
|
||
|
||
In essence, "Double-Signature" means that the new KSK is introduced
|
||
first and used to sign the DNSKEY RRset. The DS record is changed,
|
||
and finally the old KSK removed. With "Double-DS" it is the other
|
||
way around. Finally, Double-RRset does both updates more or less in
|
||
parallel.
|
||
|
||
2.3. Summary
|
||
|
||
The methods can be summarised as follows:
|
||
|
||
+------------------+------------------+-----------------------------+
|
||
| ZSK Method | KSK Method | Description |
|
||
+------------------+------------------+-----------------------------+
|
||
| Pre-Publication | (not applicable) | Publish the DNSKEY before |
|
||
| | | the RRSIG. |
|
||
| Double-Signature | Double-Signature | Publish the DNSKEY and |
|
||
| | | RRSIG at same time. (For a |
|
||
| | | KSK, this happens before |
|
||
| | | the DS is published.) |
|
||
| Double-RRSIG | (not applicable) | Publish RRSIG before the |
|
||
| | | DNSKEY. |
|
||
| (not applicable) | Double-DS | Publish DS before the |
|
||
| | | DNSKEY. |
|
||
| (not applicable) | Double-RRset | Publish DNSKEY and DS in |
|
||
| | | parallel. |
|
||
+------------------+------------------+-----------------------------+
|
||
|
||
Table 1
|
||
|
||
|
||
3. Key Rollover Timelines
|
||
|
||
3.1. Key States
|
||
|
||
During the rolling process, a key moves through different states.
|
||
The defined states are:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 7]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Generated The key has been created, but has not yet been used for
|
||
anything.
|
||
|
||
Published The DNSKEY record - or information associated with it -
|
||
is published in the zone, but predecessors of the key (or
|
||
associated information) may be held in caches.
|
||
|
||
The idea of "associated information" is used in rollover
|
||
methods where RRSIG or DS records are published first and
|
||
the DNSKEY is changed in an atomic operation. It allows
|
||
the rollover still to be thought of as moving through a
|
||
set of states. In the rest of this section, the term
|
||
"key data" should be taken to mean "key or associated
|
||
information".
|
||
|
||
Ready The new key data has been published for long enough to
|
||
guarantee that any previous versions of it have expired
|
||
from caches.
|
||
|
||
Active The key has started to be used to sign RRsets. Note that
|
||
when this state is entered, it may not be possible for
|
||
validating resolvers to use the key for validation in all
|
||
cases: the zone signing may not have finished, or the
|
||
data might not have reached the resolver because of
|
||
propagation delays and/or caching issues. If this is the
|
||
case, the resolver will have to rely on the key's
|
||
predecessor instead.
|
||
|
||
Retired The key is in the zone but a successor key has become
|
||
active. As there may still be information in caches that
|
||
that require use of the key, it is being retained until
|
||
this information expires.
|
||
|
||
Dead The key is published in the zone but there is no longer
|
||
information anywhere that requires its presence. Hence
|
||
the key can be removed from the zone at any time.
|
||
|
||
Removed The key has been removed from the zone.
|
||
|
||
There is one additional state, used where [RFC5011] considerations
|
||
are in effect (see Section 3.3.4):
|
||
|
||
Revoked The key is published for a period with the "revoke" bit
|
||
set as a way of notifying validating resolvers that have
|
||
configured it as an [RFC5011] trust anchor that it is
|
||
about to be removed from the zone.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 8]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
3.2. Zone-Signing Key Timelines
|
||
|
||
The following sections describe the rolling of a ZSK. They show the
|
||
events in the lifetime of a key (referred to as "key N") and cover
|
||
its replacement by its successor (key N+1).
|
||
|
||
3.2.1. Pre-Publication Method
|
||
|
||
The following diagram shows the timeline of a Pre-Publication
|
||
rollover. Time increases along the horizontal scale from left to
|
||
right and the vertical lines indicate events in the process.
|
||
Significant times and time intervals are marked.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|1| |2| |3| |4| |5| |6| |7| |8| |9|
|
||
| | | | | | | | |
|
||
Key N | |<-Ipub->|<--->|<-------Lzsk----->|<-Iret->|<--->|
|
||
| | | | | | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 | | | | |<-Ipub->|<->|<---Lzsk-- - -
|
||
| | | | | | | | |
|
||
Tgen Tpub Trdy Tact TpubS Tret Tdea Trem
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 1: Timeline for a Pre-Publication ZSK rollover.
|
||
|
||
Event 1: key N is generated at the generate time (Tgen). Although
|
||
there is no reason why the key cannot be generated immediately prior
|
||
to its publication in the zone (Event 2), some implementations may
|
||
find it convenient to create a pool of keys in one operation and draw
|
||
from that pool as required. For this reason, it is shown as a
|
||
separate event. Keys that are available for use but not published
|
||
are said to be generated.
|
||
|
||
Event 2: key N's DNSKEY record is put into the zone, i.e. it is added
|
||
to the DNSKEY RRset which is then re-signed with the current key-
|
||
signing key. The time at which this occurs is the key's publication
|
||
time (Tpub), and the key is now said to be published. Note that the
|
||
key is not yet used to sign records.
|
||
|
||
Event 3: before it can be used, the key must be published for long
|
||
enough to guarantee that any cached version of the zone's DNSKEY
|
||
RRset includes this key.
|
||
|
||
This interval is the publication interval (Ipub) and, for the second
|
||
or subsequent keys in the zone, is given by:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 9]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Ipub = Dprp + TTLkey
|
||
|
||
Here, Dprp is the propagation delay - the time taken in the worst-
|
||
case situation for a change introduced at the master to replicate to
|
||
all slave servers - which depends on the depth of the master-slave
|
||
hierarchy. TTLkey is the time-to-live (TTL) for the DNSKEY records
|
||
in the zone. The sum is therefore the maximum time taken for
|
||
existing DNSKEY records to expire from caches, regardless of the
|
||
nameserver from which they were retrieved.
|
||
|
||
(The case of introducing the first ZSK into the zone is discussed in
|
||
Section 3.3.5.)
|
||
|
||
After a delay of Ipub, the key is said to be ready and could be used
|
||
to sign records. The time at which this event occurs is the key's
|
||
ready time (Trdy), which is given by:
|
||
|
||
Trdy = Tpub + Ipub
|
||
|
||
Event 4: at some later time, the key starts being used to sign
|
||
RRsets. This point is the activation time (Tact) and after this, the
|
||
key is said to be active.
|
||
|
||
Event 5: at some point thought must be given to its successor (key
|
||
N+1). As with the introduction of the currently active key into the
|
||
zone, the successor key will need to be published at least Ipub
|
||
before it is activated. Denoting the publication time of the
|
||
successor key by TpubS, then:
|
||
|
||
TpubS <= Tact + Lzsk - Ipub
|
||
|
||
Here, Lzsk is the length of time for which a ZSK will be used (the
|
||
ZSK lifetime). It should be noted that unlike the publication
|
||
interval, Lzsk is not determined by timing logic, but by key
|
||
management policy. Lzsk will be set by the operator according to
|
||
their assessment of the risks posed by continuing to use a key and
|
||
the risks associated with key rollover. However, operational
|
||
considerations may mean a key is active for slightly more or less
|
||
than Lzsk.
|
||
|
||
Event 6: while key N is still active, its successor becomes ready.
|
||
From this time onwards, key N+1 could be used to sign the zone.
|
||
|
||
Event 7: When key N has been in use for an interval equal to the the
|
||
ZSK lifetime, it is retired (i.e. it will never again be used to
|
||
generate new signatures) and key N+1 activated and used to sign the
|
||
zone. This is the retire time of key N (Tret) and is given by:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 10]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tret = Tact + Lzsk
|
||
|
||
It is also the activation time of the successor key (TactS). Note
|
||
that operational considerations may cause key N to remain in use for
|
||
longer than Lzsk; if so, the retirement actually occurs when the
|
||
successor key is made active.
|
||
|
||
Event 8: the retired key needs to be retained in the zone whilst any
|
||
RRSIG records created using this key are still published in the zone
|
||
or held in caches. (It is possible that a validating resolver could
|
||
have an unexpired RRSIG record and an expired DNSKEY RRset in the
|
||
cache when it is asked to provide both to a client. In this case the
|
||
DNSKEY RRset would need to be looked up again.) This means that once
|
||
the key is no longer used to sign records, it should be retained in
|
||
the zone for at least the retire interval (Iret) given by:
|
||
|
||
Iret = Dsgn + Dprp + TTLsig
|
||
|
||
Dsgn is the delay needed to ensure that all existing RRsets have been
|
||
re-signed with the new key. Dprp is (as described above) the
|
||
propagation delay, required to guarantee that the updated zone
|
||
information has reached all slave servers, and TTLsig is the maximum
|
||
TTL of all the RRSIG records in the zone.
|
||
|
||
The time at which all RRSIG records created with this key have
|
||
expired from resolver caches is the dead time (Tdea), given by:
|
||
|
||
Tdea = Tret + Iret
|
||
|
||
...at which point the key is said to be dead.
|
||
|
||
Event 9: at any time after the key becomes dead, it can be removed
|
||
from the zone and the DNSKEY RRset re-signed with the current key-
|
||
signing key. This time is the removal time (Trem), given by:
|
||
|
||
Trem >= Tdea
|
||
|
||
...at which time the key is said to be removed.
|
||
|
||
3.2.2. Double-Signature Method
|
||
|
||
The timeline for a double-signature rollover is shown below. The
|
||
diagram follows the convention described in Section 3.2.1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 11]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
|1| |2| |3| |4| |5|
|
||
| | | | |
|
||
Key N | |<----Lzsk--->|<---Iret--->| |
|
||
| | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 | | |<-----Lzsk------- - -
|
||
| | | | |
|
||
Tgen Tact Tret Tdea Trem
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 2: Timeline for a Double-Signature ZSK rollover.
|
||
|
||
Event 1: key N is generated at the generate time (Tgen). Although
|
||
there is no reason why the key cannot be generated immediately prior
|
||
to its publication in the zone (Event 2), some implementations may
|
||
find it convenient to create a pool of keys in one operation and draw
|
||
from that pool as required. For this reason, it is shown as a
|
||
separate event. Keys that are available for use but not published
|
||
are said to be generated.
|
||
|
||
Event 2: key N is added to the DNSKEY RRset and is then used to sign
|
||
the zone; existing signatures in the zone are not removed. This is
|
||
the activation time (Tact), after which the key is said to be active.
|
||
|
||
Event 3: after the current key (key N) has been in use for its
|
||
intended lifetime (Lzsk), the successor key (key N+1) is introduced
|
||
into the zone and starts being used to sign RRsets: neither the
|
||
current key nor the signatures created with it are removed. The
|
||
successor is key is now active and the current key is said to be
|
||
retired. This time is the retire time of the key (Tret); it is also
|
||
the activation time of the successor key (TactS).
|
||
|
||
Tret = Tact + Lzsk
|
||
|
||
Event 4: before key N can be withdrawn from the zone, all RRsets that
|
||
need to be signed must have been signed by the successor key (key
|
||
N+1) and any old RRsets that do not include the new key or new RRSIGs
|
||
must have expired from caches. Note that the signatures are not
|
||
replaced - each RRset is signed by both the old and new key.
|
||
|
||
This takes Iret, the retire interval, given by the expression:
|
||
|
||
Iret = Dsgn + Dprp + max(TTLkey, TTLsig)
|
||
|
||
As before, Dsgn is the delay needed to ensure that all existing
|
||
RRsets have been signed with the new key, Dprp is the propagation
|
||
delay. The final term (the maximum of TTLkey and TTLsig) is the
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 12]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
period to wait for key and signature data associated with key N to
|
||
expire from caches. (TTLkey is the TTL of the DNSKEY RRset and
|
||
TTLsig is the maximum TTL of all the RRSIG records in the zone
|
||
created with the ZSK. The two may be different as although the TTL
|
||
of an RRSIG is equal to the TTL of the RRs in the associated RRset
|
||
[RFC4034], the DNSKEY RRset only needs to be signed with the KSK.)
|
||
|
||
At the end of this interval, key N is said to be dead. This occurs
|
||
at the dead time (Tdea) so:
|
||
|
||
Tdea = Tret + Iret
|
||
|
||
Event 5: at some later time key N and its signatures can be removed
|
||
from the zone. This is the removal time Trem, given by:
|
||
|
||
Trem >= Tdea
|
||
|
||
3.2.3. Double-RRSIG Method
|
||
|
||
The timeline for a double-signature rollover is shown below. The
|
||
diagram follows the convention described in Section 3.2.1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|1||2| |3| |4||5| |6| |7||8| |9| |10|
|
||
| | | | | | | | | |
|
||
Key N | |<-Dsgn->| | |<--------Lzsk-------->|<-Iret->| |
|
||
| |<---IpubG-->| | | | | | |
|
||
| | | | | | | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 | | | | | |<-IpubG->| | | |
|
||
| | | | | | | | | |
|
||
Tgen Tpub Trdy Tact TpubS TrdyS Tret Tdea Trem
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 3: Timeline for a Double-Signature ZSK rollover.
|
||
|
||
Event 1: key N is generated at the generate time (Tgen). Although
|
||
there is no reason why the key cannot be generated immediately prior
|
||
to its publication in the zone (Event 2), some implementations may
|
||
find it convenient to create a pool of keys in one operation and draw
|
||
from that pool as required. For this reason, it is shown as a
|
||
separate event. Keys that are available for use but not published
|
||
are said to be generated.
|
||
|
||
Event 2: key N is used to sign the zone but existing signatures are
|
||
retained. Although the new ZSK is not published in the zone at this
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 13]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
point, for analogy with the other ZSK rollover methods and because
|
||
this is the first time that key information is visible (albeit
|
||
indirectly through the created signatures) this time is called the
|
||
publication time (Tpub).
|
||
|
||
Event 3: after the signing interval, Dsgn, all RRsets that need to be
|
||
signed have been signed by the new key. (As a result, all these
|
||
RRsets are now signed twice, once by the (still-absent) key N and
|
||
once by its predecessor.
|
||
|
||
Event 4: there is now a delay while the old signature information
|
||
expires from caches. This interval is given by the expression:
|
||
|
||
Dprp + TTLsig
|
||
|
||
As before, Dprp is the propagation delay and TTLsig is the maximum
|
||
TTL of all the RRSIG records in the zone.
|
||
|
||
Again in analogy with other key rollover methods, this is defined as
|
||
key N's ready time (Trdy) and the key is said to be in the ready
|
||
state. (Although the key is not in the zone, it is ready to be
|
||
used.) The interval between the publication and ready times is the
|
||
publication interval of the signature, IpubG, i.e.
|
||
|
||
Trdy = Tpub + IpubG
|
||
|
||
where
|
||
|
||
IpubG = Dsgn + Dprp + TTLsig
|
||
|
||
Event 5: at some later time the predecessor key is removed and the
|
||
key N added to the DNSKEY RRset. As all the signed RRs have
|
||
signatures created by the old and new keys, the records can still be
|
||
authenticated. This time is the activation time (Tact) and the key
|
||
is now said to be active.
|
||
|
||
Event 6: at some point thought must be given to rolling the key. The
|
||
first step is to publish signatures created by the successor key (key
|
||
N+1) early enough for key N to be replaced after it has been active
|
||
for its scheduled lifetime. This occurs at TpubS (the publication
|
||
time of the successor), given by:
|
||
|
||
TpubS <= Tact + Lzsk - IpubG
|
||
|
||
Event 7: the signatures have propagated and the new key could be
|
||
added to the zone. This time is the ready time of the successor key
|
||
(TrdyS).
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 14]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
TrdyS = TpubS + IpubG
|
||
|
||
... where IpubG is as defined above.
|
||
|
||
Event 8: at some later time key N is removed from the zone and the
|
||
successor key (key N+1) added. This is the retire time of the key
|
||
(Tret).
|
||
|
||
Event 9: the signatures must remain in the zone for long enough that
|
||
the new DNSKEY RRset has had enough time to propagate to all caches.
|
||
Once caches contain the new DNSKEY, the old signatures are no longer
|
||
of use and can be considered to be dead. The time at which this as
|
||
they can not be validated by any key. In analogy with other rollover
|
||
methods, the time at which this occurs is the dead time (Tdea), given
|
||
by:
|
||
|
||
Tdea = Tret + Iret
|
||
|
||
... where Iret is the retire interval, given by:
|
||
|
||
Iret = Dprp + TTLkey
|
||
|
||
Dprp is as defined earlier and TTLkey is the TTL of the DNSKEY RRset.
|
||
|
||
Event 10: at some later time the signatures can be removed from the
|
||
zone. In analogy with other rollover methods this time is called the
|
||
remove time (Trem) and is given by:
|
||
|
||
Trem >= Tdea
|
||
|
||
3.3. Key-Signing Key Rollover Timelines
|
||
|
||
The following sections describe the rolling of a KSK. They show the
|
||
events in the lifetime of a key (referred to as "key N") and cover it
|
||
replacement by its successor (key N+1).
|
||
|
||
3.3.1. Double-Signature Method
|
||
|
||
The timeline for a double-signature rollover is shown below. The
|
||
diagram follows the convention described in Section 3.2.1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 15]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
|1| |2| |3| |4| |5|
|
||
| | | | |
|
||
Key N | |<-Ipub->|<--->|<-Dreg->|<-----Lksk--- - -
|
||
| | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 | | | | |
|
||
| | | | |
|
||
Tgen Tpub Trdy Tsub Tact
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
(continued...)
|
||
|
||
|6| |7| |8| |9| |10| |11|
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Key N - - -------------Lksk------->|<-Iret->| |
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 |<-Ipub->|<--->|<-Dreg->|<--------Lksk----- - -
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
TpubS TrdyS TsubS Tret Tdea Trem
|
||
|
||
---- Time (cont) ---->
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 4: Timeline for a Double-Signature KSK rollover.
|
||
|
||
Event 1: key N is generated at the generate time (Tgen). Although
|
||
there is no reason why the key cannot be generated immediately prior
|
||
to its publication in the zone (Event 2), some implementations may
|
||
find it convenient to create a pool of keys in one operation and draw
|
||
from that pool as required. For this reason, it is shown as a
|
||
separate event. Keys that are available for use but not published
|
||
are said to be generated.
|
||
|
||
Event 2: key N is introduced into the zone; it is added to the DNSKEY
|
||
RRset, which is then signed by key N and all currently active KSKs.
|
||
(So at this point, the DNSKEY RRset is signed by both key N and its
|
||
predecessor KSK. If other KSKs were active, it is signed by these as
|
||
well.) This is the publication time (Tpub); after this the key is
|
||
said to be published.
|
||
|
||
Event 3: before it can be used, the key must be published for long
|
||
enough to guarantee that any validating resolver that has a copy of
|
||
the DNSKEY RRset in its cache will have a copy of the RRset that
|
||
includes this key: in other words, that any prior cached information
|
||
about the DNSKEY RRset has expired.
|
||
|
||
The interval is the publication interval (Ipub) and, for the second
|
||
or subsequent KSKs in the zone, is given by:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 16]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Ipub = DprpC + TTLkey
|
||
|
||
... where DprpC is the propagation delay for the child zone (the zone
|
||
containing the KSK being rolled) and TTLkey the TTL for the DNSKEY
|
||
RRset. The time at which this occurs is the key's ready time, Trdy,
|
||
given by:
|
||
|
||
Trdy = Tpub + Ipub
|
||
|
||
(The case of introducing the first KSK into the zone is discussed in
|
||
Section 3.3.5.)
|
||
|
||
Event 4: at some later time, the DS record corresponding to the new
|
||
KSK is submitted to the parent zone for publication. This time is
|
||
the submission time, Tsub.
|
||
|
||
Event 5: the DS record is published in the parent zone. As this is
|
||
the point at which all information for authentication - both DNSKEY
|
||
and DS record - is available in the two zones, in analogy with other
|
||
rollover methods, this is called the activation time of the key
|
||
(Tact):
|
||
|
||
Tact = Tsub + Dreg
|
||
|
||
... where Dreg is the registration delay, the time taken after the DS
|
||
record has been received by the parent zone manager for it to be
|
||
placed in the zone. (Parent zones are often managed by different
|
||
entities, and this term accounts for the organisational overhead of
|
||
transferring a record.)
|
||
|
||
Event 6: while key N is active, thought needs to be given to its
|
||
successor (key N+1). At some time before the scheduled end of the
|
||
KSK lifetime, the successor KSK is published in the zone. (As
|
||
before, this means that the DNSKEY RRset is signed by both the
|
||
current and successor KSK.) This time is the publication time of the
|
||
successor key, TpubS, given by:
|
||
|
||
TpubS <= Tact + Lksk - Dreg - Ipub
|
||
|
||
... where Lksk is the scheduled lifetime of the KSK.
|
||
|
||
Event 7: after an interval Ipub, key N+1 becomes ready (in that all
|
||
caches that have a copy of the DNSKEY RRset have a copy of this key).
|
||
This time is the ready time of the successor (TrdyS).
|
||
|
||
Event 8: at the submission time of the successor (TsubS), the DS
|
||
record corresponding to key N+1 is submitted to the parent zone.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 17]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Event 9: the successor DS record is published in the parent zone and
|
||
the current DS record withdrawn. The current key is said to be
|
||
retired and the time at which this occurs is Tret, given by:
|
||
|
||
Tret = Tact + Lksk
|
||
|
||
Event 10: key N must remain in the zone until any caches that contain
|
||
a copy of the DS RRset have a copy containing the new DS record.
|
||
This interval is the retire interval, given by:
|
||
|
||
Iret = DprpP + TTLds
|
||
|
||
... where DprpP is the propagation delay in the parent zone and TTLds
|
||
the TTL of a DS record in the parent zone.
|
||
|
||
As the key is no longer used for anything, is said to be dead. This
|
||
point is the dead time (Tdea), given by:
|
||
|
||
Tdea = Tret + Iret
|
||
|
||
Event 11: at some later time, key N is removed from the zone (at the
|
||
remove time Trem); the key is now said to be removed.
|
||
|
||
Trem >= Tdea
|
||
|
||
3.3.2. Double-DS Method
|
||
|
||
The timeline for a double-DS rollover is shown below. The diagram
|
||
follows the convention described in Section 3.2.1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 18]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
|1| |2| |3| |4| |5| |6|
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Key N | |<-Dreg->|<-IpubP->|<-->|<---------Lksk------- - -
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 | | | | |<---->|<--Dreg+IpubP- - -
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Tgen Tsub Tpub Trdy Tact TsubS
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
(continued...)
|
||
|
||
|7| |8| |9| |10|
|
||
| | | |
|
||
Key N - - -----Lksk---------->|<-Iret->| |
|
||
| | | |
|
||
Key N+1 - - --Dreg+IpubP->|<--->|<------Lksk------ - -
|
||
| | | |
|
||
TrdyS Tret Tdea Trem
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 5: Timeline for a Double-DS KSK rollover.
|
||
|
||
Event 1: key N is generated at the generate time (Tgen). Although
|
||
there is no reason why the key cannot be generated immediately prior
|
||
to its publication in the zone (Event 2), some implementations may
|
||
find it convenient to create a pool of keys in one operation and draw
|
||
from that pool as required. For this reason, it is shown as a
|
||
separate event. Keys that are available for use but not published
|
||
are said to be generated.
|
||
|
||
Event 2: the DS RR is submitted to the parent zone for publication.
|
||
This time is the submission time, Tsub.
|
||
|
||
Event 3: after the registration delay, Dreg, the DS record is
|
||
published in the parent zone. This is the publication time Tpub,
|
||
given by:
|
||
|
||
Tpub = Tsub + Dreg
|
||
|
||
Event 4: at some later time, any cache that has a copy of the DS
|
||
RRset will have a copy of the DS record for key N. At this point, key
|
||
N, if introduced into the DNSKEY RRset, could be used to validate the
|
||
zone. For this reason, this time is known as the key's ready time,
|
||
Trdy, and is given by:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 19]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Trdy = Tpub + IpubP
|
||
|
||
IpubP is the parent publication interval and is given by the
|
||
expression:
|
||
|
||
IpubP = DprpP + TTLds
|
||
|
||
... where DprpP is the propagation delay for the parent zone and
|
||
TTLds the TTL assigned to DS records in that zone.
|
||
|
||
Event 5: at some later time, the key rollover takes place and the new
|
||
key (key N) introduced and used to sign the RRset.
|
||
|
||
As both the old and new DS records have been in the parent zone long
|
||
enough to ensure that they are in caches that contain the DS RRset,
|
||
the zone can be authenticated throughout the rollover - either the
|
||
resolver has a copy of the DNSKEY RRset authenticated by the
|
||
predecessor key, or it has a copy of the updated RRset authenticated
|
||
with the new key.
|
||
|
||
This time is key N's activation time (Tact) and at this point the key
|
||
is said to be active.
|
||
|
||
Event 6: at some point thought must be given to key replacement. The
|
||
DS record for the successor key must be submitted to the parent zone
|
||
at a time such that when the current key is withdrawn, any cache that
|
||
contains the zone's DS records have data about the DS record of the
|
||
successor key. The time at which this occurs is the submission time
|
||
of the successor, given by:
|
||
|
||
TsubS <= Tact + Lksk - IpubP - Dreg
|
||
|
||
... where Lksk is the lifetime of key N according to policy.
|
||
|
||
Event 7: the successor key (key N+1) enters the ready state i.e. its
|
||
DS record is now in caches that contain the parent DS RRset. This is
|
||
the ready time of the successor key, TrdyS.
|
||
|
||
(The interval between events 6 and 7 for the key N+1 correspond to
|
||
the the interval between events 2 and 4 for key N)
|
||
|
||
Event 8: when key N has been active for its lifetime (Lksk), it is
|
||
removed from the DNSKEY RRset and key N+1 added; the RRset is then
|
||
signed with the new key. This is the retire time of the key, Tret,
|
||
given by:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 20]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Tret = Tact + Lksk
|
||
|
||
Event 9: at some later time, all copies of the old DNSKEY RRset have
|
||
expired from caches and the old DS record is no longer needed. In
|
||
analogy with other rollover methods, this is called the dead time,
|
||
Tdea, and is given by:
|
||
|
||
Tdea = Tret + Iret
|
||
|
||
... where Iret is the retire interval, given by:
|
||
|
||
Iret = DprpC + TTLkey
|
||
|
||
As before, this term includes DprpC, the time taken to propagate the
|
||
RRset change through the master-slave hierarchy of the child zone and
|
||
TTLkey, the time taken for the DNSKEY RRset to expire from caches.
|
||
|
||
Event 10: at some later time, the DS record is removed from the
|
||
parent zone. In analogy with other rollover methods, this is the
|
||
removal time (Trem), given by:
|
||
|
||
Trem >= Tdea
|
||
|
||
3.3.3. Double-RRset Method
|
||
|
||
The timeline for a double-RRset rollover is shown below. The diagram
|
||
follows the convention described in Section 3.2.1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|1| |2| |3| |4| |5| |6|
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Key N | |<-Ipub->|<-----Lksk----->| |
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Key N+1 | | | |<-Ipub->| |
|
||
| | | | | |
|
||
Tgen Tpub Tact TpubS Tret Trem
|
||
|
||
---- Time ---->
|
||
|
||
|
||
Figure 6: Timeline for a Double-RRset KSK rollover.
|
||
|
||
Event 1: key N is generated at the generate time (Tgen). Although
|
||
there is no reason why the key cannot be generated immediately prior
|
||
to its publication in the zone (Event 2), some implementations may
|
||
find it convenient to create a pool of keys in one operation and draw
|
||
from that pool as required. For this reason, it is shown as a
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 21]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
separate event. Keys that are available for use but not published
|
||
are said to be generated.
|
||
|
||
Event 2: the key is added to and used for signing the DNSKEY RRset
|
||
and is thereby published in the zone. At the same time the
|
||
corresponding DS record is submitted to the parent zone for
|
||
publication. This time is the publish time (Tpub) and the key is now
|
||
said to be published.
|
||
|
||
Event 3: at some later time, the DS record is published in the parent
|
||
zone and at some time after that, the updated information has reached
|
||
all caches: any cache that holds a DNSKEY RRset from the child zone
|
||
will have a copy that includes the new KSK, and any cache that has a
|
||
copy of the parent DS RRset will have a copy that includes the new DS
|
||
record.
|
||
|
||
The time at which this occurs is called the activation time of the
|
||
new KSK (Tact), given by:
|
||
|
||
Tact = Tpub + Ipub
|
||
|
||
... where Ipub is the publication interval, given by:
|
||
|
||
Ipub = max(IpubP, IpubC),
|
||
|
||
IpubP being the publication interval in the parent zone and IpubC the
|
||
publication interval in the child zone. The parent zone's
|
||
publication interval is given by:
|
||
|
||
IpubP = Dreg + DprpP + TTLds
|
||
|
||
where Dreg is the registration delay, the time taken for the DS
|
||
record to be published in the parent zone. DprpP is the parent
|
||
zone's propagation delay and TTLds is the TTL of the DS record in
|
||
that zone.
|
||
|
||
The child's publication interval is given by a similar equation:
|
||
|
||
IpubC = DprpC + TTLkey
|
||
|
||
... where DprpC is the propagation delay in the child zone and TTLkey
|
||
the TTL of a DNSKEY record.
|
||
|
||
Event 4: at some point we need to give thought to key replacement.
|
||
The successor key (key N+1) must be introduced into the zone (and its
|
||
DS record submitted to the parent) at a time such that it becomes
|
||
active when the current key has been active for its lifetime, Lksk.
|
||
This time is TpubS, the publication time of the successor key, and is
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 22]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
given by:
|
||
|
||
TpubS <= Tact + Lksk - Ipub
|
||
|
||
... where Lksk is the lifetime of the KSK.
|
||
|
||
Event 5: key N+1's DNSKEY and DS records are in any caches that
|
||
contain the child zone DNSKEY and/or the parent zone DS RR, and so
|
||
the zone can be validated with the new key. This is the activation
|
||
time of the successor key (TactS) and by analogy with other rollover
|
||
methods, it is also the retire time of the current key. Since at
|
||
this time the zone can be validated by the successor key, there is no
|
||
reason to keep the current key in the zone and the time can also be
|
||
regarded as the current key's dead time. Thus:
|
||
|
||
Tret = Tdea = TactS = Tact + Lksk
|
||
|
||
Event 6: at some later time, the key N's DS and DNSKEY records can be
|
||
removed from their respective zones. In analogy with other rollover
|
||
methods, this is the removal time (Trem), given by:
|
||
|
||
Trem >= Tdea
|
||
|
||
3.3.4. Interaction with Configured Trust Anchors
|
||
|
||
Although the preceding sections have been concerned with rolling KSKs
|
||
where the trust anchor is a DS record in the parent zone, zone
|
||
managers may want to take account of the possibility that some
|
||
validating resolvers may have configured trust anchors directly.
|
||
|
||
Rolling a configured trust anchor is dealt with in [RFC5011]. It
|
||
requires introducing the KSK to be used as the trust anchor into the
|
||
zone for a period of time before use, and retaining it (with the
|
||
"revoke" bit set) for some time after use.
|
||
|
||
3.3.4.1. Addition of KSK
|
||
|
||
When the new key is introduced, the publication interval (Ipub) in
|
||
the Double-Signature and Double-RRset methods should also be subject
|
||
to the condition:
|
||
|
||
Ipub >= Dprp + max(30 days, TTLkey)
|
||
|
||
... where the right hand side of the expression is the time taken for
|
||
the change to propagate to all nameservers for the zone plus the add
|
||
hold-down time defined in section 2.4.1 of [RFC5011].
|
||
|
||
In the Double-DS method, instead of the changing of the KSK RR being
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 23]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
instantaneous, there must now be a period of overlap. In other
|
||
words, the new KSK must be introduced into the zone at least:
|
||
|
||
DprpC + max(30 days, TTLkey)
|
||
|
||
... before the switch is made.
|
||
|
||
3.3.4.2. Removal of KSK
|
||
|
||
The timeline for the removal of the key in all methods is modified by
|
||
introducing a new state, "revoked". When the key reaches its dead
|
||
time, instead of being declared "dead", it is revoked; the "revoke"
|
||
bit is set on the DNSKEY RR and is published in (and used to sign)
|
||
the DNSKEY RRset. The key is maintained in this state for the
|
||
"revoke" interval, Irev, given by:
|
||
|
||
Irev >= 30 days
|
||
|
||
... 30 days being the [RFC5011] remove hold-down time. After this
|
||
time, the key is dead and can be removed from the zone.
|
||
|
||
3.3.5. Introduction of First KSK
|
||
|
||
There is an additional consideration when introducing a KSK into a
|
||
zone for the first time, and that is that no validating resolver
|
||
should be in a position where it can access the trust anchor before
|
||
the KSK appears in the zone. To do so will cause it to declare the
|
||
zone to be bogus.
|
||
|
||
This is important: in the case of a secure parent, it means ensuring
|
||
that the DS record is not published in the parent zone until there is
|
||
no possibility that a validating resolver can obtain the record yet
|
||
not be able to obtain the corresponding DNSKEY. In the case of an
|
||
insecure parent, i.e. the initial creation of a new security apex, it
|
||
is not possible to guarantee this. It is up to the operator of the
|
||
validating resolver to wait for the new KSK to appear at all servers
|
||
for the zone before configuring the trust anchor.
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. Standby Keys
|
||
|
||
Although keys will usually be rolled according to some regular
|
||
schedule, there may be occasions when an emergency rollover is
|
||
required, e.g. if the active key is suspected of being compromised.
|
||
The aim of the emergency rollover is to allow the zone to be re-
|
||
signed with a new key as soon as possible. As a key must be in the
|
||
ready state to sign the zone, having at least one additional key (a
|
||
standby key) in this state at all times will minimise delay.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 24]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
In the case of a ZSK, a standby key only really makes sense with the
|
||
Pre-Publication method. A permanent standby DNSKEY RR should be
|
||
included in zone or successor keys could be introduced as soon as
|
||
possible after a key becomes active. Either way results in one or
|
||
more additional ZSKs in the DNSKEY RRset that can immediately be used
|
||
to sign the zone if the current key is compromised.
|
||
|
||
(Although in theory the mechanism could be used with both the Double-
|
||
Signature and Double-RRSIG methods, it would require pre-publication
|
||
of the signatures. Essentially, the standby key would be permanently
|
||
active, as it would have to be periodically used to renew signatures.
|
||
Zones would also permanently require two sets of signatures.)
|
||
|
||
It is also possible to have a standby KSK. The Double-Signature
|
||
method requires that the standby KSK be included in the DNSKEY RRset;
|
||
rolling the key then requires just the introduction of the DS record
|
||
in the parent. Note that the standby KSK should also be used to sign
|
||
the DNSKEY RRset. As the RRset and its signatures travel together,
|
||
merely adding the KSK without using it to sign the DNSKEY RRset does
|
||
not provide the desired time saving: for a KSK to be used in a
|
||
rollover the DNSKEY RRset must be signed with it, and this would
|
||
introduce a delay while the old RRset (not signed with the new key)
|
||
expires from caches.
|
||
|
||
The idea of a standby KSK in the Double-RRset rollover method
|
||
effectively means having two active keys (as the standby KSK and
|
||
associated DS record would both be published at the same time in
|
||
their respective zones).
|
||
|
||
Finally, in the Double-DS method of rolling a KSK, it is not a
|
||
standby key that is present, it is a standby DS record in the parent
|
||
zone.
|
||
|
||
Whatever algorithm is used, the standby item of data can be included
|
||
in the zone on a permanent basis, or be a successor introduced as
|
||
early as possible.
|
||
|
||
|
||
5. Algorithm Considerations
|
||
|
||
The preceding sections have implicitly assumed that all keys and
|
||
signatures are created using a single algorithm. However, [RFC4035]
|
||
(section 2.4) states that "There MUST be an RRSIG for each RRset
|
||
using at least one DNSKEY of each algorithm in the zone apex DNSKEY
|
||
RRset".
|
||
|
||
Except in the case of an algorithm rollover - where the algorithms
|
||
used to create the signatures are being changed - there is no
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 25]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
relationship between the keys of different algorithms. This means
|
||
that they can be rolled independently of one another. In other
|
||
words, the key rollover logic described above should be run
|
||
separately for each algorithm; the union of the results is included
|
||
in the zone, which is signed using the active key for each algorithm.
|
||
|
||
|
||
6. Limitation of Scope
|
||
|
||
This document represents current thinking at the time of publication.
|
||
However, the subject matter is evolving and it is more than likely
|
||
that this document will need to be revised in the future.
|
||
|
||
Some of the techniques and ideas that DNSSEC operators considering
|
||
differ from this those described in this document. Of note are
|
||
alternatives to the strict split into KSK and ZSK key roles and the
|
||
consequences for rollover logic from partial signing (i.e. when the
|
||
new key initially only signs a fraction of the zone while leaving
|
||
other signatures generated by the old key in place).
|
||
|
||
Furthermore, as noted in section 5, this document covers only rolling
|
||
keys of the same algorithm, it does not cover transition to/from/
|
||
addition/deletion of different algorithms. Algorithm rollovers will
|
||
require a separate document.
|
||
|
||
The reader is therefore reminded that DNSSEC is as of publication in
|
||
early stages of deployment, and best practices may further develop
|
||
over time.
|
||
|
||
|
||
7. Summary
|
||
|
||
For ZSKs, "Pre-Publication" is generally considered to be the
|
||
preferred way of rolling keys. As shown in this document, the time
|
||
taken to roll is wholly dependent on parameters under the control of
|
||
the zone manager.
|
||
|
||
In contrast, "Double-RRset" is the most efficient method for KSK
|
||
rollover due to the ability to have new DS records and DNSKEY RRsets
|
||
propagate in parallel. The time taken to roll KSKs may depend on
|
||
factors related to the parent zone if the parent is signed. For
|
||
zones that intend to comply with the recommendations of [RFC5011], in
|
||
virtually all cases the rollover time will be determined by the
|
||
RFC5011 "add hold-down" and "remove hold-down" times. It should be
|
||
emphasized that this delay is a policy choice and not a function of
|
||
timing values and that it also requires changes to the rollover
|
||
process due to the need to manage revocation of trust anchors.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 26]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Finally, the treatment of emergency key rollover is significantly
|
||
simplified by the introduction of standby keys as standard practice
|
||
during all types of rollovers.
|
||
|
||
|
||
8. IANA Considerations
|
||
|
||
This memo includes no request to IANA.
|
||
|
||
|
||
9. Security Considerations
|
||
|
||
This document does not introduce any new security issues beyond those
|
||
already discussed in [RFC4033], [RFC4034], [RFC4035] and [RFC5011].
|
||
|
||
|
||
10. Acknowledgements
|
||
|
||
The authors gratefully acknowledge help and contributions from Roy
|
||
Arends, Matthijs Mekking and Wouter Wijngaards.
|
||
|
||
|
||
11. Change History (To be removed on publication)
|
||
|
||
o draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-02
|
||
* Significant re-wording of some sections.
|
||
* Removal of events noting change of state of predecessor key from
|
||
ZSK Double-RRSIG and Double-Signature methods.
|
||
* Change order of bullet points (and some wording) in section 1.1.
|
||
* Remove discussion of advantages and disadvantages of key roll
|
||
methods from section 2: draft is informative and does not give
|
||
recommendations.
|
||
* Removal of discussion of upper limit to retire time relationship
|
||
to signature lifetime.
|
||
* Remove timing details of first key in the zone and move
|
||
discussion of first signing of a zone to later in the document).
|
||
(Matthijs Mekking)
|
||
* Removal of redundant symbols from Appendix A.
|
||
|
||
o draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-01
|
||
* Added section on limitation of scope.
|
||
|
||
o draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-00
|
||
* Change to author contact details.
|
||
|
||
o draft-morris-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-02
|
||
* General restructuring.
|
||
* Added descriptions of more rollovers (IETF-76 meeting).
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 27]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
* Improved description of key states and removed diagram.
|
||
* Provided simpler description of standby keys.
|
||
* Added section concerning first key in a zone.
|
||
* Moved [RFC5011] to a separate section.
|
||
* Various nits fixed (Alfred Hoenes, Jeremy Reed, Scott Rose, Sion
|
||
Lloyd, Tony Finch).
|
||
|
||
o draft-morris-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-01
|
||
* Use latest boilerplate for IPR text.
|
||
* List different ways to roll a KSK (acknowledgements to Mark
|
||
Andrews).
|
||
* Restructure to concentrate on key timing, not management
|
||
procedures.
|
||
* Change symbol notation (Diane Davidowicz and others).
|
||
* Added key state transition diagram (Diane Davidowicz).
|
||
* Corrected spelling, formatting, grammatical and style errors
|
||
(Diane Davidowicz, Alfred Hoenes and Jinmei Tatuya).
|
||
* Added note that in the case of multiple algorithms, the
|
||
signatures and rollovers for each algorithm can be considered as
|
||
more or less independent (Alfred Hoenes).
|
||
* Take account of the fact that signing a zone is not atomic
|
||
(Chris Thompson).
|
||
* Add section contrasting pre-publication rollover with double
|
||
signature rollover (Matthijs Mekking).
|
||
* Retained distinction between first and subsequent keys in
|
||
definition of initial publication interval (Matthijs Mekking).
|
||
|
||
o draft-morris-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-00
|
||
Initial draft.
|
||
|
||
|
||
12. References
|
||
|
||
12.1. Normative References
|
||
|
||
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
||
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
|
||
RFC 4033, March 2005.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||
Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions",
|
||
RFC 4034, March 2005.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
|
||
Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 28]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005.
|
||
|
||
[RFC5011] StJohns, M., "Automated Updates of DNS Security (DNSSEC)
|
||
Trust Anchors", RFC 5011, September 2007.
|
||
|
||
12.2. Informative References
|
||
|
||
[RFC4641] Kolkman, O. and R. Gieben, "DNSSEC Operational Practices",
|
||
RFC 4641, September 2006.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Appendix A. List of Symbols
|
||
|
||
The document defines a number of symbols, all of which are listed
|
||
here. All are of the form:
|
||
|
||
All symbols used in the text are of the form:
|
||
|
||
<TYPE><id><INST>
|
||
|
||
where:
|
||
|
||
<TYPE> is an upper-case character indicating what type the symbol is.
|
||
Defined types are:
|
||
|
||
D delay: interval that is a feature of the process
|
||
|
||
I interval between two events
|
||
|
||
L lifetime: interval set by the zone manager
|
||
|
||
T a point in time
|
||
|
||
TTL TTL of a record
|
||
|
||
I and T and TTL are self-explanatory. Like I, D, and L are time
|
||
periods, but whereas I values are intervals between two events (even
|
||
if the events are defined in terms of the interval, e.g. the dead
|
||
time occurs "retire interval" after the retire time), D, and L are
|
||
fixed intervals: a "D" interval (delay) is a feature of the process,
|
||
probably outside control of the zone manager, whereas an "L" interval
|
||
(lifetime) is chosen by the zone manager and is a feature of policy.
|
||
|
||
<id> is lower-case and defines what object or event the variable is
|
||
related to, e.g.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 29]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
act activation
|
||
|
||
pub publication
|
||
|
||
ret retire
|
||
|
||
Finally, <INST> is a capital letter that distinguishes between the
|
||
same variable applying to different instances of an object and is one
|
||
of:
|
||
|
||
C child
|
||
|
||
G signature
|
||
|
||
K key
|
||
|
||
P parent
|
||
|
||
S successor
|
||
|
||
The list of variables used in the text is:
|
||
|
||
Dprp Propagation delay. The amount of time for a change made at
|
||
a master nameserver to propagate to all the slave
|
||
nameservers.
|
||
|
||
DprpC Propagation delay in the child zone.
|
||
|
||
DprpP Propagation delay in the parent zone.
|
||
|
||
Dreg Registration delay: the time taken for a DS record
|
||
submitted to a parent zone to appear in it. As a parent
|
||
zone is often managed by a different organisation to that
|
||
managing the child zone, the delays associated with passing
|
||
data between zones is captured by this term.
|
||
|
||
Dsgn Signing delay. After the introduction of a new ZSK, the
|
||
amount of time taken for all the RRs in the zone to be
|
||
signed with it.
|
||
|
||
Ipub Publication interval. The amount of time that must elapse
|
||
after the publication of a key before it can be assumed
|
||
that any resolvers that have the DNSKEY RRset cached have a
|
||
copy of this key.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 30]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
IpubC Publication interval in the child zone.
|
||
|
||
IpubG Publication interval for the signature created by a ZSK:
|
||
the amount of time that must elapse after the signature has
|
||
been created before it can be assumed that any resolves
|
||
that have the RRset and RRSIG cached have a copy of this
|
||
signature.
|
||
|
||
IpubP Publication interval in the parent zone.
|
||
|
||
Iret Retire interval. The amount of time that must elapse after
|
||
a key enters the retire state for any signatures created
|
||
with it to be purged from validating resolver caches.
|
||
|
||
Irev Revoke interval. The amount of time that a KSK must remain
|
||
published with the revoke bit set to satisfy [RFC5011]
|
||
considerations.
|
||
|
||
Lksk Lifetime of a key-signing key. This is the intended amount
|
||
of time for which this particular KSK is regarded as the
|
||
active KSK. Depending on when the key is rolled-over, the
|
||
actual lifetime may be longer or shorter than this.
|
||
|
||
Lzsk Lifetime of a zone-signing key. This is the intended
|
||
amount of time for which the ZSK is used to sign the zone.
|
||
Depending on when the key is rolled-over, the actual
|
||
lifetime may be longer or shorter than this.
|
||
|
||
Tact Activation time of the key; the time at which the key is
|
||
regarded as the principal key for the zone.
|
||
|
||
TactS Activation time of the successor key.
|
||
|
||
Tdea Dead time of a key. Applicable only to ZSKs, this is the
|
||
time at which any record signatures held in validating
|
||
resolver caches are guaranteed to be created with the
|
||
successor key.
|
||
|
||
Tgen Generate time of a key. The time that a key is created.
|
||
|
||
Tpub Publication time of a key. The time that a key appears in
|
||
a zone for the first time.
|
||
|
||
TpubS Publication time of the successor key.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 31]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Trem Removal time of a key. The time at which a key is removed
|
||
from the zone.
|
||
|
||
Tret Retire time of a key. The time at which a successor key
|
||
starts being used to sign the zone.
|
||
|
||
Trdy Ready time of a key. The time at which it can be
|
||
guaranteed that validating resolvers that have key
|
||
information from this zone cached have a copy of this key
|
||
in their cache. (In the case of KSKs, should the
|
||
validating resolvers also have DS information from the
|
||
parent zone cached, the cache must include information
|
||
about the DS record corresponding to the key.)
|
||
|
||
TrdyS Ready time of a successor key.
|
||
|
||
Tsub Submission time - the time at which the DS record of a KSK
|
||
is submitted to the parent.
|
||
|
||
TsubS Submission time of the successor key.
|
||
|
||
TTLds Time to live of a DS record (in the parent zone).
|
||
|
||
TTLkey Time to live of a DNSKEY record.
|
||
|
||
TTLsig The maximum time to live of all the RRSIG records in the
|
||
zone that were created with the ZSK.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Authors' Addresses
|
||
|
||
Stephen Morris
|
||
Internet Systems Consortium
|
||
950 Charter Street
|
||
Redwood City, CA 94063
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
Phone: +1 650 423 1300
|
||
Email: stephen@isc.org
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 32]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft DNSSEC Key Timing Considerations March 2011
|
||
|
||
|
||
Johan Ihren
|
||
Netnod
|
||
Franzengatan 5
|
||
Stockholm, SE-112 51
|
||
Sweden
|
||
|
||
Phone: +46 8615 8573
|
||
Email: johani@autonomica.se
|
||
|
||
|
||
John Dickinson
|
||
Sinodun Internet Technologies Ltd
|
||
Stables 4 Suite 11, Howbery Park
|
||
Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BA
|
||
UK
|
||
|
||
Phone: +44 1491 818120
|
||
Email: jad@sinodun.com
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Morris, et al. Expires September 11, 2011 [Page 33]
|
||
|