Re: Review of draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-02 (Als was: Secdir review of draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-02)

[Dan Romascanu <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ondrej,

Thanks for addressing my comments. The nits can be fixed at any time you
find more convenient before publication.

Regards,

Dan



On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Ondřej Surý <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Magnus and Dan,
>
> thanks for the review.
>
> Magnus, you are right, I have removed the first full paragraph
> about "security properties" from Security Considerations
> from my git version as the security properties of EdDSA
> are better described in Normative references anyway.
>
> https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/ietf/commit/7b52c8e2bbe44042a279a81b960270
> fdd103d9a2
>
> Dan,
>
> good catches, I fixed the nits in the git:
>
> https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/ietf/commit/bbfc7ce43fb1f46c91fb7f5de564d9
> 07d035aadf
>
> I would be happy to upload next revision after Last Call
> is finished or just let the RFC editors to fix it.
>
> Cheers,
> --
>  Ondřej Surý -- Technical Fellow
>  --------------------------------------------
>  CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.    --     Laboratoře CZ.NIC
>  Milesovska 5, 130 00 Praha 3, Czech Republic
>  mailto:[e-mail]    https://nic.cz/
>  --------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Magnus Nyström" <[e-mail]>
> > To: [e-mail], "draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa" <
> [e-mail]>
> > Sent: Monday, 12 December, 2016 02:44:18
> > Subject: Secdir review of draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-02
>
> > I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
> > ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
> > IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
> > security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat
> > these comments just like any other last call comments.
> >
> > This document describes how to use two two specific Edwards Curves
> > (Elliptic Curves) in conjunction with DNSSEC, namely ed25519 and
> > ed448.
> >
> > The only comment I have on this document is that the Security
> > Considerations section plainly states, without any reference or proof:
> >
> > "Ed25519 and Ed448 offers improved security properties and
> > implementation characteristics compared to RSA and ECDSA algorithms"
> >
> > I suggest either adding references to proofs of these statements or
> > alternatively just remove the sentence (since it doesn't really add
> > anything to the memo); the remaining paragraphs in the Security
> > Considerations section is what really covers what someone implementing
> > the memo should know or be aware of.
> >
> > -- Magnus
>
> ~~~~
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dan Romascanu" <[e-mail]>
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Cc: "draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa all" <draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-
> [e-mail]>, "curdle" <[e-mail]>,
> > [e-mail]
> > Sent: Sunday, 11 December, 2016 12:21:25
> > Subject: Review of draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-02
>
> > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> > Review result: Ready with Nits
> >
> > Summary: Ready, with nits
> >
> > I am not an expert in this field, but the document seems to meet its
> > goals, it's clear and precise
> >
> > Major issues:
> >
> > Minor issues:
> >
> > Nits/editorial comments:
> >
> > 1. Section 4: s/Section5.1.7/Sections 5.1.7/
> >
> > 2. Section 8: 'The following entry has been added to
> >   the registry' - I may be wrong, but the section seems to define two
> > new entries in the registry rather than one
>
>