Re: Request for a code point assignment for ED25519 - draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-01

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jari,
At 03:12 10-04-2014, Jari Arkko wrote:
>SSH is obviously important and I am a long-term OpenSSH user myself 
>:-) And I also happen to believe in timely registration of values in 
>registries, particularly when there is running code.

I am also an OpenSSH user. :-)  I wrote the draft because of the code.

>I looked at the draft and it seems fine, ready to move forward. I do 
>not personally have any knowledge about ED25519 and I cannot say 
>whether it is something that we should be using in IETF standards. 
>Stephen seems to think that waiting a bit to get an opinion from the 
>crypto experts would be useful. What is your opinion on that, SM? 
>What about others, do you have an opinion? And SM, do you have an 
>idea how soon we need an answer for the implementations to usefully 
>employ the allocated number?

The draft is intended as Informational.  I would not argue that what 
is in the draft is an IETF standard.  I suggested to Stephen to start 
the Last Call as it would take a month.  That does not prevent the 
gathering of input from folks who do crypto.

It is usually good to get more opinions from crypto experts.  I did 
some research before writing the draft to determine whether there 
were any concerns.  I did not find anything noteworthy.

 From a code point request perspective a possible outcome would be to 
deny the request.  It is a problem when a registry does not reflect 
what is used in the wild.  I am okay with having disclaimer text in 
the draft (I'll defer to Stephen).  The code was not included in the 
last release (March).  Note that I am not one of the person who gets 
to decide about code release.  I could provide feedback saying, for 
example, that there will be a (IETF) decision about the code point 
request by end of May.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy