Re: [dnsext] Report from chairs

[Federico Lucifredi <[e-mail]>]

[ Moderators note: Post was moderated, either because it was posted by
   a non-subscriber, or because it was over 20K.  
   With the massive amount of spam, it is easy to miss and therefore 
   delete relevant posts by non-subscribers. 
   Please fix your subscription addresses. ]

I support this draft and will be glad to put the footwork in to get it
passed if help is needed.

The issue seems overtly clear, Francis summed it up pretty well. I would
not underestimate the importance of security certification, so I would
be happy to help eliminating a paradox in that angle.

 Best -F

Francis Dupont wrote:
>  In your previous mail you wrote:
> 
>    4.  EXPIRED DRAFTS
>    
>        - draft-ietf-dnsext-tsig-md5-deprecated
>    
>    Is anyone still interested in this draft?  We have no movement on it.
>    
> => there is a clear lack of support for this draft. I propose to give
> the question to the security area so they should say if it is fine to
> keep MD5 mandatory in an IETF protocol.
> 
> Two comments:
>  - MD5 is used in a way (HMAC) it is not proved to be weak
> 
>  - the issue is MD5 it is forbidden for most (i.e., all I know of :-)
>   certified cryptos so it is not possible to run a both certified (for
>   the crypto) and conformant (to standards) TSIG tool.
>   Now it seems to be only a formal concern...
> 
> Thanks
> 
> [e-mail]
> 


-- 

_________________________________________
-- "'Problem' is a bleak word for challenge" - Richard Fish
(Federico L. Lucifredi) - http://www.lucifredi.com