Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-dnsop-algorithm-update-07

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 09 April 2019 11:45 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4D1120785; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 04:45:27 -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] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 5kkR7YjFDYPl; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 04:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (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 076B0120784; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 04:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44dlpV1P7Qz45c; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:45:22 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1554810322; bh=sB9/1xMezZHYraepxEJTSGyaNHmuBoQ/kKK/5Fibt34=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=eXBHUrdumVCXofKY5rUP9UB1OfQc3q+ZC/oUXIwixmAwdHj0hDE920vCxTZka9h7m fSgUA8soPz7A9tdclWqPGr+c12Nj0VNpnkMtPZPHkMKrN7ulHeg14nn85bKVRPUK4i sI4tyBhUJQ9olTppYQ7TaMTWgMjv86yr+0mFkM1o=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eZ9cVVYuHsBQ; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:45:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:45:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AE03B5C856; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 07:45:18 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca AE03B5C856
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A353A40D358A; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 07:45:18 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 07:45:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
cc: Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com>, draft-ietf-dnsop-algorithm-update.all@ietf.org, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, dnsop@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <DC3108A2-118C-4EE3-8122-0888E4997891@cooperw.in>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1904090727150.739@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <155454218650.21891.1515975582177931040@ietfa.amsl.com> <DC3108A2-118C-4EE3-8122-0888E4997891@cooperw.in>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/h0xB7RLn0N0bhvzMCGq1WP95fk0>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-dnsop-algorithm-update-07
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2019 11:45:27 -0000

On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, Alissa Cooper wrote:

> Peter, thanks for your review. I entered a Yes ballot and pointed to your review.

Indeed, thanks for the review Peter!

I've incorporated all of your suggestions, with the exception of:


>> Page 4, Section 1.3: In general, it would be nice if there were references in
>> the paragraphs following the table that point to the research that led to the
>> statements of strength or lack of strength of the algorithms.  Then again, this
>> isn't an academic paper, so references aren't strictly required either.  While
>> I mostly (but not completely) agree with the notes on the individual
>> algorithms, the average reader is left to take the statements as gospel rather
>> than being able to make an informed decision on the current state of
>> cryptography.

We did not want to add these to the document, in an attempt to keep the
document short and on topic.

>> Page 5, 8th paragraph, 1st sentence: change "ED25519" to "Ed25519".  Change
>> "ED448" to "Ed448".  Only make these two changes if you are referring to these
>> algorithms by the names given to them by their authors as opposed to the
>> mnemonics used within DNSSEC.  (This statement also applies to the Ed25519
>> comment below.) Insert "the" before "Edwards".

We are using the mnemonics, so I left these as is.

>> Page 5, 8th paragraph, 4th sentence: change "ED25519" to "Ed25519".

Same,

>> Page 6, Section 3.3, 3rd paragraph, 1st fragment: change "for" to "regarding".
>> Append "are summarized in the table below." to the fragment.

I did not understand this change request?

Paul