Re: [Din] Draft / Specification of the GNU Name System

["Schanzenbach, Martin" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dirk,

just wanting to touch base if there will be a DINRG meeting at the next IETF?
We have continued working on the draft and there have further been efforts to more cleanly specify the set reconciliation for zone revocation in a general fashion here [1].

Of course we are still available and interested in presenting/discussing the GNS draft at DINRG.

Best
Martin

[1] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-summermatter-set-union-00.txt

> On 8. Dec 2020, at 21:01, Dirk Kutscher <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Martin,
> 
>> we wanted to check back with you if it makes sense to coordinate next
>> week at IETF 109. It seems as if dinrg is not (yet) listed on the
>> agenda?
>> 
>> According to the minutes of IETF 108, the next steps would involve
>> coordination/deconflicting with DINRG:
>> https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-108-secdispatch#
> 
> thanks for bringing this up and apologies for the late reply.
> 
> We didn't meet around IETF-109.
> 
> This is definitely an interesting topic for DINRG, and we should talk about it at an upcoming meetings.
> 
> We are currently planning upcoming meetings etc., and we should have a more concrete plan for early 2021 activities after new year.
> 
> In the meantime, please feel free to use the mailing list as well.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dirk
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> Martin
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 15:13 +0200, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
>>> Dear DINRG,
>>> 
>>> at IETF 104, we have presented to you our work on the GNU Name System
>>> [1].
>>> Since then, we have been working on improvements and a technical
>>> specification of the system [2].
>>> At IETF 108, we appeared at secdispatch in order to discuss if the
>>> draft may fit into any existing WG in IETF (or IRTF) [3].
>>> We were encouraged to ask DINRG if it would be interested in this
>>> work and continue improving and working on it (see minutes of
>>> secdispatch). Your charter would certainly support the general theme
>>> of the protocol: "The evolution of distributed ledger technologies
>>> and the platforms that leverage them has given rise to the
>>> development of decentralized communication and infrastructure
>>> systems, and experiments with the same. Some examples include name
>>> resolution (Namecoin, Ethereum Name Service), identity management
>>> (OneName), distributed storage (IPFS, MaidSafe), distributed
>>> applications, or DApps (Blockstack), and IP address allocation and
>>> delegation."
>>> 
>>> Since our appearance at secdispatch, we have received a lot of
>>> feedback from the community and experts. We have taken the time to
>>> incorporate the feedback and the result is in the current version of
>>> the draft as well as our implementation.
>>> As you can see, the draft versions 01 and 02 differ significantly.
>>> The two major changes regarding the protocol that we have made are:
>>> 
>>> 1. Improve crypto agility: Allow other zone key types and key
>>> derivation schemes and define the required properties.
>>> 2. Improve crypto implementation: The used symmetric encryption
>>> scheme has been replaced to be more resilient to IND-CCA
>>> 
>>> For (1.) we have drafted an alternative scheme based on Schnorr
>>> signatures. This instantiation is still a draft and not implemented.
>>> Any feedback here is specifically welcomed and helpful.
>>> 
>>> Finally, we would be happy to appear at the next IETF and discuss
>>> whether DINRG would be a place to continue our work with you.
>>> 
>>> Best
>>> Martin
>>> 
>>> [1]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/104/slides/slides-104-dinrg-gnu-name-system-00.pdf
>>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schanzen-gns/
>>> [3]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/108/agenda/agenda-108-secdispatch-02
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Din mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Din mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din