From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <429BB192-1F75-44F3-AC67-730F152E4C29@gmail.com>
From: Patrick Kelly <kameo76890@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
In-Reply-To: <58dec826cbba066ea2cf1362ffa28e96@brasstown.quanstro.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii;
	format=flowed;
	delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPod Mail 7D11)
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:14:41 -0500
References: <4B57048D.6040002@maht0x0r.net>
	<58dec826cbba066ea2cf1362ffa28e96@brasstown.quanstro.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Are we ready for DNSSEC ?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: c17eb3c4-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025



On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:42 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
wrote:

> On Wed Jan 20 08:27:58 EST 2010, maht-9fans@maht0x0r.net wrote:
>> By the end of May, all the root servers should be running DNSSEC
>>
>> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/01/19/the-internet-is-about-to-get-a-lot-safer/
>>
>> Is Plan9 ready for such a move?
>
> there are two answers to this:
>
> yes, if you mean by this that plan 9 dns will continue to
> operate.
>
> no, if you mean by this that plan 9 dns will be able to use
> or serve dnssec records.
>
> one would likely need to start with a different structure
> than ndb/dns currently has to get dnssec.  but i think that
> the most of the query logic could be reused.
As I understand it; It is an extension, the base DNS stuff should not
change.
What would need to be changed in ndb, or would looking at the source
be better?
>
> - erik
>