Re: [DNSOP] Current DNSOP thread and why 1024 bits

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 02 April 2014 22:14 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC2F1A03FB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 BoBC-5FwGcqY for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 632431A03FC for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.233.219]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s32MEQ3h014111 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Apr 2014 15:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1396476879; bh=fdwVTSy3eQWBUPg/piIFsKKUkmp2su47BxWTDCfk6/A=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=kf+cigEfQJpCJ4o16RN5GawqpUtHW1qzxUVBw1U/pbi0Ws62C7D64jNAT35UHOEiv i0GGfSwXo4M9zAI4ecpkOP8aMXxWgB5vVedCtQC009lI/aJWPGBNMpwwEILqBGa1Cl xTIDI3MPzwOBbqC1+zopPtWc+PJWSTN244w8nnhA=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1396476879; i=@elandsys.com; bh=fdwVTSy3eQWBUPg/piIFsKKUkmp2su47BxWTDCfk6/A=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=wtFMebDRoxnHopP2FwYaQUPBKqn4SxjLz70vRHKMqC1pa1F1cqbQ8JI4DrEx5So3o bhriKLsOZ/woo2fcz4//wPDFJkZ39Lw6Hs4nNJ1j2d9yIDwtBr1r7DseijisiVHXK3 KVOi60OzQDDE2glmIiD2qfyz77gypMIXmF3p77F0=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140402140404.0d9d4608@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 14:46:01 -0700
To: "Rose, Scott" <scott.rose@nist.gov>, dnsop@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <24554BB9-2EF4-43E9-BD32-92F8EA2FB5E4@nist.gov>
References: <0EA28BE8-E872-46BA-85FD-7333A1E13172@icsi.berkeley.edu> <53345C77.8040603@uni-due.de> <B7893984-2FAD-472D-9A4E-766A5C212132@pch.net> <102C13BE-E45E-437A-A592-FA373FF5C8F0@ogud.com> <474B0834-C16B-4843-AA0A-FC2A2085FEFB@icsi.berkeley.edu> <CAMm+Lwh-G7D5Cjx4NWMOhTjBZd=VVRHiPdK7L1zm-P0QRP8P2Q@mail.gmail.com> <knJn1n01E0xxhYs01nJoHJ> <1904697C-49EF-4F77-A71A-3E0E4FC16575@cox.net> <0EA28BE8-E872-46BA-85FD-7333A1E13172@icsi.berkeley.edu> <53345C77.8040603@uni-due.de> <B7893984-2FAD-472D-9A4E-766A5C212132@pch.net> <102C13BE-E45E-437A-A592-FA373FF5C8F0@ogud.com> <474B0834-C16B-4843-AA0A-FC2A2085FEFB@icsi.berkeley.edu> <CAMm+Lwh-G7D5Cjx4NWMOhTjBZd=VVRHiPdK7L1zm-P0QRP8P2Q@mail.gmail.com> <knJn1n01E0xxhYs01nJoHJ> <1904697C-49EF-4F77-A71A-3E0E4FC16575@cox.net> <ED3B19A8-D4AD-46AC-84BD-9FD1C333EAF0@icsi.berkeley.edu> <6.2.5.6.2.20140402080754.0d35b798@resistor.net> <24554BB9-2EF4-43E9-BD32-92F8EA2FB5E4@nist.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/XuuR5R7LUUKDaWCAqfjXRrnCozc
Cc: Edward Lewis <edlewis.subscriber@cox.net>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Current DNSOP thread and why 1024 bits
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 22:14:52 -0000

Hi Scott,
At 10:13 02-04-2014, Rose, Scott wrote:
>The only DNSSEC related NIST SP's are 800-57 and 800-81-2.  SP 
>800-57 is in 3 parts, part one is general key considerations and 
>part 3 covers specific uses like DNSSEC.  It's showing its age though.
>
>The US Federal policy (now) is 2048 bit RSA for all uses, DNSSEC has 
>a special exemption for 1024 bit ZSK's if desired (to reduce risks 
>of fragmented packets).  I do know some .gov zones using 2048 bit 
>KSK and ZSK's as local policies can call for stronger keys.  By 
>2015, .gov/mil zones should migrate to ECDSA.  Not sure if that will 
>happen given the track record, but that is the roadmap.

Thanks for the above information.  Adding to it, 1024-bit RSA keys 
are allowed until 2015.  There is an explanation about that 
recommendation, i.e. it's not only about packet size.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy