[saag] Re: New Version Notification for draft-rsalz-crypto-registries-00.txt

[Tero Kivinen <[e-mail]>]

Damien Miller writes:
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2024, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> 
> > For the SSH there is already first come first serve policy (all names
> > that contained @) but for some reason that was not enough. And
> > implementations and interoperability works fine even with those first
> > come first served names. There is no reason to require strings without
> > @-chracter for algorithms, both forms work fine in the
> > implementations.
> 
> The reason that it's not enough is that agreeing on names alone is
> insufficient for reliable interoperability. At some point someone
> needs to write down a specification and, at that point, it makes
> sense to assign a standard name too.

For long time the ssh-1 protocol was described in the file called RFC
inside the source distribution package.

When someone (like openssh) creates a new thing with [e-mail],
they should include the documentation of that either on their web
page, or inside the source distribution etc. Not everything needs to
be an RFC, and most of those things that are defined that way are
quite simple to document.

Yes, some of those are more complicated and should most likely be
document in the RFC, but new ciphers, macs etc should not be that
complicated. The SSH RFCs do not use that much text to describe them
anyways.

We could add IANA registry with lists commonly used @-signed names and
provides a pointer to the documentation for them (or contact point if
no public documentation is available).

On the other hand, as the IANA registries have been changed to have
different allocation policy, even that is no longer needed.
-- 
[e-mail]