Re: [dnsext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-04.txt

[Joe Abley <[e-mail]>]

On 2013-03-11, at 15:16, Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]> wrote:

> This update from Scott is an attempt to solve the objections raised in
> an IESG DISCUSS without violating the WG's consensus that this
> document was about implementation and not deployment.  I think it
> walks that line, and I am comfortable going ahead.
> 
> If, however, you object, you need to squawk in the next 24 hours.
> Otherwise, our AD is going to sign off.  This is a tight deadline
> because (1) as shepherd, I am convinced this actually solves the
> problem and (2) the document hung fire long enough that we are up
> against the change of the IESG.  Please be aware that, if the current
> changes do not solve the problem, I have no idea how to proceed; we
> will probably have to abandon this document in that case.

I think this document is useful, and solves a problem.

One possible nit: the IANA Considerations Section specifies that this document (when published) act as The reference for the named IANA registry. It's not clear to me whether this adequately anticipates the addition of new algorithms in the future. I think it's reasonable for this document to provide a reference for all algorithms currently listed in that registry, but presumably future algorithms would be listed with different references, and the important thing is to specify that those references exist (i.e. that the documents by which future algorithms are added specify clearly what the implementation status of those new algorithms is).

Hence, I suggest in:

3.  IANA Considerations

   This document lists the implementation status of cryptographic
   algorithms used with DNSSEC.  These algorithms are maintained in an
   IANA registry at http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers.
   Because this document establishes the implementation status of every
   algorithm, it should be listed as a reference for the entire
   registry.

REMOVE:

   Because this document establishes the implementation status of every
   algorithm, it should be listed as a reference for the entire
   registry.

ADD:

   Because this document establishes the implementation status of every
   algorithm listed in this registry at the time of writing, it should be
   listed as the reference for all those algorithms. Future entries to
   this registry should include an implementation status with corresponding
   pertinent registries.


Joe