Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-rsasha256-05
Scott Rose <scottr@nist.gov> Mon, 18 August 2008 13:19 UTC
Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742C328C124; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.583
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.465, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UJp-TWYs4e9H; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8037B3A6AE4; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1KV4UX-000C4F-88 for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:09:49 +0000
Received: from [129.6.16.227] (helo=smtp.nist.gov) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <scottr@nist.gov>) id 1KV4UI-000C2f-Mj for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:09:42 +0000
Received: from 98-140.antd.nist.gov (98-140.antd.nist.gov [129.6.140.98]) by smtp.nist.gov (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7ID92d9023507 for <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:09:02 -0400
Message-ID: <48A9746E.7060101@nist.gov>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:09:02 -0400
From: Scott Rose <scottr@nist.gov>
Organization: NIST
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-rsasha256-05
References: <20080814224325.GD60819@commandprompt.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080814224325.GD60819@commandprompt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-NIST-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-NIST-MailScanner-From: scottr@nist.gov
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Although it is one week later than we indicated at the Dublin meeting, > this message starts a four week working group last call for "Use of > SHA-2 algorithms with RSA in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource Records for > DNSSEC". The latest draft, and the history of the document, can be > found at > <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dnsext/draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-rsasha256/>. > > The docment is intended for the standards track, and if adopted will > become a Proposed Standard. > > Please read the document carefully. Please send any remarks you have > about the draft to the working group mailing list. > I have read the document and I support the draft progressing along the standards track. However, I agree with Paul Hoffman's comment that the reference to RFC 4641 for key sizes should be dropped. Especially considering that DNSOP WG has opened it up for revision. Scott -- ---------------------------------------- Scott Rose Computer Scientist NIST ph: +1 301-975-8439 scott.rose@nist.gov http://www-x.antd.nist.gov/dnssec http://www.dnsops.gov/ ----------------------------------------- -- to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
- Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsext-dns… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsext… Paul Hoffman
- Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dnsext… Scott Rose
- [dnsext] Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ie… Peter Koch
- Re: [dnsext] Re: Working Group Last Call for draf… Jelte Jansen
- Re: [dnsext] Re: Working Group Last Call for draf… Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: [dnsext] Re: Working Group Last Call for draf… Mark Andrews
- implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dnsext]… Jelte Jansen
- Re: [dnsext] Re: Working Group Last Call for draf… Paul Hoffman
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Sam Weiler
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Andrew Sullivan
- [dnsext] explicit non-support of NSEC3 Roy Arends
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Matt Larson
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Frederico A C Neves
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Peter Koch
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Jelte Jansen
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Matt Larson
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Olaf Kolkman
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Samuel Weiler
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Scott Rose
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Mark Andrews
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Mark Andrews
- [dnsext] Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 Wes Hardaker
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Blacka, David
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: implied NSEC3 support in rsasha256 (was: [dns… Samuel Weiler