Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost
"Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@wonderhamster.org> Mon, 15 February 2010 16:01 UTC
Return-Path: <spencer@wonderhamster.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9933A79B3 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:01:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
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 E8OD2kZ0lKyR for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:01:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C143A7B85 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:01:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from S73602b (67-207-123-4.static.wiline.com [67.207.123.4]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus4) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MY7Qm-1NC8UH1nVo-00VU7n; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:02:33 -0500
Message-ID: <8E06CA9085DD4D0E906BD6178C495AFE@china.huawei.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencer@wonderhamster.org>
To: mrex@sap.com, Basil Dolmatov <dol@cryptocom.ru>
References: <201002151420.o1FEKCMx024227@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:52:57 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+vXKj4u+Xmo/68/Xmr/Aa0g1gKQKb7wbSLTXg s1q2ZaM+P3fe972ESGL0bX7lETGkyRmdvpcR0bLSzqpaguOaPk B//Y+zt8Q5SLCydLK6jWxfKOvYgmB4HozAuuBPgXIQ=
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:01:09 -0000
On one point in this discussion... I'm not saying that everyone will SEE it, but there actually is an errata process for RFCs, and the omission of the year-version suffix in RFC 4357 seems like something that would be really helpful to submit an errata for. Submission page is at http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.php. The errata link does show up on many hyperlinked versions of RFCs, so things aren't as bleak as they were ten years ago, to pick an interval. Thanks, Spencer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Rex" <mrex@sap.com> To: "Basil Dolmatov" <dol@cryptocom.ru> Cc: <ietf@ietf.org> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 8:20 AM Subject: Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost > > IMHO, rfc4357 should have been completely stripped from GOST R34.10-1994 > > before publication if what you describes really applies to this > > algorithm. > > I think that is a question to authors of RFC4357 and I think that > corrections should be issued. There is no correction process for RFCs. Preferably the new document about GOST R34.10 signature algorithms should be merged with rfc4357 into rfc4357bis, and this time the GOST R34.10-1994 algorithm should only be mentioned in the Security Considerations as having been completely retired/phased out in 2004.
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Paul Hoffman
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Olafur Gudmundsson
- draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Stephen Kent
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Andrew Sullivan
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Paul Hoffman
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Richard L. Barnes
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Michael Dillon
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Sean Turner
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Sean Turner
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Basil Dolmatov
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Basil Dolmatov
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Stephen Farrell
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Andrew Sullivan
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Stephen Kent
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost David Conrad
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Edward Lewis
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Sean Turner
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Basil Dolmatov
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Basil Dolmatov
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost ned+ietf
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Stephen Kent
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Stephen Kent
- RE: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Rex, Martin
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Spencer Dawkins
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Mark Andrews
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Basil Dolmatov
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Andrew Sullivan
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Martin Rex
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Ran Atkinson
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Phillip Hallam-baker
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Phillip Hallam-baker
- Re: draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-gost Olafur Gudmundsson