Re: [dnsext] draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-01

Suits me - we have a push to use ECDSA for digital signing (by 2015 for DNSSEC), so I don't have a problem with it.  I just wanted WG consensus before making the change.

Scott

On Mar 26, 2012, at 7:34 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote:

> From the very first days of DNSSEC, I've always thought the EC crypto,
> with its more compact keys and signatures, was the way to go
> eventually...
> 
> Thanks,
> Donald
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>  d3e3e3@gmail.com
> 
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 6:29 PM, RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, 26th March 2012, Scott Rose wrote, in part:
>>> If the group thinks any of the assigned implementation status
>>> for entries should be changed - please state so.
>>> 
>>> Personally, I'm thinking ECDSA might be moved to "Recommended..."
>>> since there are some advantages, but willing to leave it as is.
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> I support the idea of moving ECDSA to "Recommended".
>> 
>> Most of us are likely to end up deploying ECDSA eventually,
>> we might as well encourage folks to support it sooner
>> rather than later.  An earlier start to implementation
>> enables earlier widespread interoperability, which in
>> turn enables widespread deployment.  These things all
>> take time.  There is no value in delay.
>> 
>> * The financial sector already seems to be migrating
>>  from RSA to EC for a wide range of things.
>> 
>> * Separately, the published literature indicates that
>>  MUCH shorter EC keys have strength equivalent to
>>  MUCH longer RSA keys, so EC appears to scale better.[1][2]
>>  For example, [2] indicates that an ECC key size of
>>  163 bits has strength equivalent to an RSA key size
>>  of 1024 bits.
>> 
>> * Published literature also indicates that EC is less
>>  computationally expensive than RSA for equivalent-strength
>>  key sizes.  So EC is better for systems with smaller CPUs
>>  or that need to perform higher volumes of transactions.[3]
>> 
>> Yours,
>> 
>> Ran
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> REFERENCES:
>> 
>> [1] K. Lauter, "The Advantages of Elliptic Curve Cryptography for
>>    Wireless Security", IEEE Wireless Communications, Volume 11,
>>    Issue 1, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, February 2004.
>> 
>> [2] V. Gupta, et alia, "Performance Analysis of Elliptic Curve
>>    Cryptography for SSL", Proceedings of 1st ACM Workshop on
>>    Wireless Security, ACM, Atlanta, GA, September 2002.
>> 
>> [3] Nils Gura, et alia, "Comparing Elliptical Curve Cryptography
>>    and RSA on 8-bit CPUs", Proceedings of 6th International Workshop
>>    on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems '04, published in
>>    Volume 3156, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag,
>>    Berlin, DE, 2004.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> dnsext mailing list
>> dnsext@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext
> _______________________________________________
> dnsext mailing list
> dnsext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext