[dnsext] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-03.txt> (Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status) to Best Current Practice
The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Wed, 27 June 2012 13:52 UTC
Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBEBD21F863E; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1340805123; bh=m1QCQQgTGKM4HqjdejS1c1s6n+/YACmRlrmlTvvy2PM=; h=MIME-Version:From:To:Message-ID:Date:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=sWVpqO4dfuRG1B8s3FQdfvbk0RGWdldogmMEeFK/RPQoCjEc829ei4WjVyoa0WOe8 6mEoTnUiiceHMfrrKNLCqwCwzacgCi/X9FHm2eLuVgDD5r1oAAYzZzirEVRJxt7ZJQ W1QuBk3vudiGs+QUGFoGjdgSxOzAlWTkTY9Jvpk4=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 106A121F863E; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.527
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.527 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.072, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 671ZNoBRDeFk; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DBE621F85A4; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.21
Message-ID: <20120627135200.7350.6275.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 06:52:00 -0700
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: [dnsext] Last Call: <draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-03.txt> (Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status) to Best Current Practice
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
The IESG has received a request from the DNS Extensions WG (dnsext) to consider the following document: - 'Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status' <draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-03.txt> as Best Current Practice The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-07-11. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract The DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) requires the use of cryptographic algorithm suites for generating digital signatures over DNS data. There is currently an IANA registry for these algorithms that lacks the recommended implementation status of each algorithm. This document provides an applicability statement on algorithm implementation status for DNSSEC component software. This document lists each algorithm's status based on the current reference. In the case that an algorithm is specified without an implementation status, this document assigns one. This document updates RFCs 2536, 2539, 3110, 4034, 4398, 5155, 5702, and 5933. Note that this document responds to the objections raised against draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-08; the earlier document was split into this document and draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-update. The implementation status information published in this document was originally published in draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-08, which made a novel and controversial use of the IANA registry. That approach was too controversial, so this document publishes that information separately. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. _______________________________________________ dnsext mailing list dnsext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext