[DNSOP] Re: Thoughts on handling large RRset sizes with PQC and other datasets

On 02. 07. 26 18:32, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> The DNS world is a bit behind in thinking about the impact of PQC
> algorithms and their impact on DNSSEC.  That's not being quite fair, as
> there have been a bunch of people doing research and pointing out the
> issues are pressing and difficult.  But few solutions exist other than
> "just use TCP".
> 
> So I was thinking about that problem space and how to continue being as
> efficient as possible without requiring every connection be over TCP and
> every connection always downloading large RRsets.  And during thinking
> about that, the bad idea fairy paid me a visit.  So I wrote down the
> whispers from the fairy that entered my ears:
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hardaker-dnsop-nothing-new/

Is this going far enough? Are we _sure_ 64k message limit is going to be 
enough? Say 3 NSECs with their RRSIGs put as at 21 k per RRSIG tops.

Anyone got an insight if we better start working on a new message format?

-- 
Petr Špaček

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]