Re: [netconf] Does draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations-19 have any bearing on the NETCONF crypto drafts

Kent Watsen <> Mon, 15 February 2021 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90D2B3A0C49 for <>; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 06:44:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.006
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.006 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iaSqAEM5Gds9 for <>; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 06:44:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F8313A0C06 for <>; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 06:44:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=224i4yxa5dv7c2xz3womw6peuasteono;; t=1613400279; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:Feedback-ID; bh=qN79tP1Oq5jPdH/UkUQy9uSoe9QrbGub07XnS0VMXEA=; b=kP8a9U4FyqC3eCrR5MMHBzu/RQEVRuc3AjFsWWh5sEvxNk9d5uDcn9HNCa+cLZid ADOFUkBYdHFbfYJQU3MPQnG/JsQ5Erjd28ST/r29TDu6E8BbaA9vi5CYA+T2WC43z+6 Go3SkLOgoIiRADa+2pjgOxF+a0AeVBLDCKIQfSFA=
From: Kent Watsen <>
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_94E1F70A-6E27-4D9A-9208-BDE32E925790"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:44:39 +0000
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: "" <>
To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <>
References: <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.
X-SES-Outgoing: 2021.02.15-
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netconf] Does draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations-19 have any bearing on the NETCONF crypto drafts
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:44:49 -0000

Hi Rob,

The closest our work comes is in the "crypt-types" draft itself, where we have "public-key-format" and "private-key-format".  Presumably (after skimming the draft) the same "ECPrivateKey" and "SubjectPublicKeyInfo" ASN.1 structures are used to persist the key.  If so, then no impact, otherwise there may be a need to define other identities from our base "private-ket-format" and/or "public-key-format" identities, which could be done as a future effort (i.e., no need to block current publication).


> On Feb 15, 2021, at 6:31 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <> wrote:
> Hi Kent,
> draft-ietf-lwig-curve-representations-19 is in IESG review, the abstract states:
>   This document specifies how to represent Montgomery curves and
>   (twisted) Edwards curves as curves in short-Weierstrass form and
>   illustrates how this can be used to carry out elliptic curve
>   computations using existing implementations of, e.g., ECDSA and ECDH
>   using NIST prime curves.  We also provide extensive background
>   material that may be useful for implementers of elliptic curve
>   cryptography.
> I just wanted to check whether this draft is relevant to the crypto types work in NETCONF at all (e.g., draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server).  From a quick look, I didn't think that it would have any impact, but thought that I should check.
> Regards,
> Rob