IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-srose-dkim-ecc-00.txt

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 07 April 2017 15:34 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEF3E129449 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:34:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=R2jV/GxS; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=qGszuWw2
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oKmmOiE7mZii for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:34:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B4D912773A for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:34:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 91040 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2017 15:34:09 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=1639e.58e7b171.k1704; bh=VnUeNaWj9f7CV+ts0aEFS0qjyMSfMavnhHfhXalUwXE=; b=R2jV/GxSJK8xNTN4a7Ghd/F+z/vVOD9OhRc2PKQo8SD1kne4NQ++FID1AsNLFx0q7R8114MQPhdl5RZwo/iCXblih6gKjqgEvsDEGAIxQh7ub7Ql1wzGSnOYgV/LWLcDK/AFKTgpsujfLh4BFLMQdbMfjxas8woTaoaw4DLw36YeIfcS9IBzUdtB9alIMhxfk1HDmw7r6zF0kOIKGSrjIa4SIRv0fA8RZU8sEqD4hu94Vx2RqyOFbybQ+4dCQ+mY
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=1639e.58e7b171.k1704; bh=VnUeNaWj9f7CV+ts0aEFS0qjyMSfMavnhHfhXalUwXE=; b=qGszuWw2wV2nDJz8fpmvuRCy+PnZfRU2SPJ/W8TLH6oFJCNthXH6686vuqNKDPyor5GDM1cn1+mOW/VQ169+m0TwJUFcmmsEz/Pp0pVkAq9FSe0Dr26uQorajI3rqegIdmEomKOilzMXndSNfgk0c6JeFlpKqRzMFQBKrrscWMGYkdoQrImeWt2gnjoBeH5GmiIlAtZ8ZVFHh+WzvLpE0U0AU5g1Oa62YDdlyT+tqLj6YKO+oFdHmpGU/xXkbwi9
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 07 Apr 2017 15:34:09 -0000
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:34:08 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.20.1704071133160.55219@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Scott Rose <scott.rose@nist.gov>
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <ebf2fd36-c8bb-1983-12ad-e0875998f5bd@nist.gov>
References: <20170406235540.47811.qmail@ary.lan> <ebf2fd36-c8bb-1983-12ad-e0875998f5bd@nist.gov>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (OSX 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lNVR9UNqNncwfteKJirPHwkf3f0>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-srose-dkim-ecc-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:34:18 -0000

> Ok - nice to know I'm not the only one thinking this (means I'm not totally 
> crazy).  I'm willing to drop my draft and just contribute/review this one. 
> There is no reason to have multiple drafts trying to do the same thing.

No, don't, we can moosh them together.  I don't know much about elliptic 
crypto and could use some advice about which algorithms are widely 
implemented and which are likely to be used for a long time.

>
> Scott
>
>
> On 04/06/2017 07:55 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> In article <ac345fcc-ae8e-a92a-0ec3-4792529c865d@nist.gov> you write:
>>> This may be of interest to this group, as there isn't an active DKIM WG
>>> anymore.
>> At the DISPATCH session at IETF 98 I pitched a proposal to update DKIM
>> with a new crypto algorithm and/or a more compact key representation
>> (put the key in the signature and put a hash of it in the DNS.)
>> 
>> Reaction was positive, people told me to write a proposed charter,
>> which starts here:
>> 
>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch/current/msg06701.html
>> 
>> Also see:
>> 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-levine-dcrup-dkim-crypto/
>> 
>> R's,
>> John
>
>

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email