IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for Revised IANA Considerations for DNSSEC

Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz> Mon, 20 September 2021 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E553A13BD; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 8cgi4BnABS_O; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:06:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [217.31.204.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E17E3A13BE; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 08:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPV6:2a02:768:2d1c:226::a2e] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:768:2d1c:226::a2e]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D820C140994; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 17:06:22 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <fa1a5ee5-7d3a-d08d-49a6-cdaf4169a277@nic.cz>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 17:06:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.1.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-iana-cons@ietf.org
References: <CADyWQ+Fyi1M56t6WQ=0EB1yZf1tKP7uSiaZHLLtvDLn_KUHrng@mail.gmail.com> <CADyWQ+HGP0OTnH9YniM+XQc9dHMkTC4Amid8BoRm-1OZ=6Mkgw@mail.gmail.com> <CADZyTk=bQxJHw8b2eXYLnJYx+2hpEKZBerR5FN0_n5nEnQc3kA@mail.gmail.com> <f8997302-0325-7499-9cb4-4d971db2ec9d@nic.cz> <CADZyTknMeK5Qygjj4kWF6Ouau8fPgyoPmkpc6SDrSa8qPp--HA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vladimír Čunát <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CADZyTknMeK5Qygjj4kWF6Ouau8fPgyoPmkpc6SDrSa8qPp--HA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/3BglL1z3zMU6g5TrgSwTYV9WphE>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call for Revised IANA Considerations for DNSSEC
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 15:06:32 -0000

On 15/09/2021 23.51, Daniel Migault wrote:
> I do not have any specific example in mind and as far as I know GOST 
> is standard [1] - This was already the case during the call for 
> adoption and I suppose it was mentioned as an example.

To clarify, that DNSSEC-standard GOST only uses crypto that's been 
obsolete for years, I believe.  And renewing this to the new GOST 2012 
versions was the main spark for the iana-cons draft. 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email