Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make key selection more flexible. #464

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2024

Conversation

ximon18
Copy link
Member

@ximon18 ximon18 commented Dec 5, 2024

E.g. LDNS seems to consider DS and CDS and CDNSKEY resource record types as well as DNSKEY when selecting keys.

E.g. LDNS seems to consider DS and CDS and CDNSKEY resource record types as well as DNSKEY when selecting keys.
@ximon18 ximon18 requested a review from a team December 5, 2024 14:01
Copy link
Member

@mozzieongit mozzieongit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder whether SigningKey should impl PartialEq to replace the index workaround

@ximon18
Copy link
Member Author

ximon18 commented Dec 5, 2024

I wonder whether SigningKey should impl PartialEq to replace the index workaround

I tried that in an earlier attempt but couldn't get it to compile. I guess you'd need Hash as well. I think the issue was lifetimes as the keys would need to be present in multiple collections but cannot be Copy'd or Cloned, and thus have to be stored by reference.

@mozzieongit
Copy link
Member

mozzieongit commented Dec 6, 2024

That seems unreasonably complicated for now, but something to consider for the future maybe

@ximon18 ximon18 merged commit bc68b0b into multiple-key-signing Dec 6, 2024
17 checks passed
@ximon18 ximon18 deleted the select-signing-keys-by-rtype branch December 6, 2024 11:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants