<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Enabling DNSSEC on BIND</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.techscrawl.com/2009/01/13/enabling-dnssec-on-bind/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.techscrawl.com/2009/01/13/enabling-dnssec-on-bind/</link>
	<description>TechScrawl is a technology blog focusing on a wide variety of technology related areas including enterprise IT, information security, penetration testing, networking, virtualization, and Windows &#38; Linux administration.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 23:32:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tom Dickson</title>
		<link>http://blog.techscrawl.com/2009/01/13/enabling-dnssec-on-bind/#comment-320</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Dickson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:51:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.techscrawl.com/?p=539#comment-320</guid>
		<description>I tried getting this setup, but it wouldn&#039;t work.

I used dnssec-signzone -N INCREMENT -a -t -g -o example.com example.com.zone and that seemed to work fine, but once I added trusted-keys to my caching resolved, it refused to do anything, insisiting that it was &quot;not insecure resolving&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tried getting this setup, but it wouldn&#8217;t work.</p>
<p>I used dnssec-signzone -N INCREMENT -a -t -g -o example.com example.com.zone and that seemed to work fine, but once I added trusted-keys to my caching resolved, it refused to do anything, insisiting that it was &#8220;not insecure resolving&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alan Clegg</title>
		<link>http://blog.techscrawl.com/2009/01/13/enabling-dnssec-on-bind/#comment-314</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan Clegg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.techscrawl.com/?p=539#comment-314</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the shout-out.  :)  If you have any questions or comments on the &quot;DNSSEC in 6 minutes&quot;, please let me know.

Also, be aware that the newly available BIND 9.7 (featuring &quot;DNSSEC for humans&quot;) makes DNSSEC much easier to manage (from the authoritative side).

The first bits of the root being signed have now hit the world (&quot;dig @l.root-servers.net . ns +dnssec&quot;) but are not yet able to be used for validation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the shout-out.  :)  If you have any questions or comments on the &#8220;DNSSEC in 6 minutes&#8221;, please let me know.</p>
<p>Also, be aware that the newly available BIND 9.7 (featuring &#8220;DNSSEC for humans&#8221;) makes DNSSEC much easier to manage (from the authoritative side).</p>
<p>The first bits of the root being signed have now hit the world (&#8220;dig @l.root-servers.net . ns +dnssec&#8221;) but are not yet able to be used for validation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Steingruebl</title>
		<link>http://blog.techscrawl.com/2009/01/13/enabling-dnssec-on-bind/#comment-163</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Steingruebl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:25:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.techscrawl.com/?p=539#comment-163</guid>
		<description>Thanks.  This is an excellent summary and quite handy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks.  This is an excellent summary and quite handy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
