Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-moskowitz-ipsecme-ipseckey-eddsa-05
review-moskowitz-ipsecme-ipseckey-eddsa-05-opsdir-lc-schoenwaelder-2022-11-22-00

Request Review of draft-moskowitz-ipsecme-ipseckey-eddsa
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2022-12-12
Requested 2022-11-14
Authors Robert Moskowitz , Tero Kivinen , Michael Richardson
I-D last updated 2022-11-22
Completed reviews Dnsdir Last Call review of -03 by Johan Stenstam (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -05 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Watson Ladd (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Behcet Sarikaya (diff)
Dnsdir Last Call review of -06 by Johan Stenstam (diff)
Dnsdir Telechat review of -09 by Johan Stenstam
Assignment Reviewer Jürgen Schönwälder
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-moskowitz-ipsecme-ipseckey-eddsa by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/wzP-arvW3-4pAXyb_VYu8qzyAP0
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 09)
Result Serious Issues
Completed 2022-11-22
review-moskowitz-ipsecme-ipseckey-eddsa-05-opsdir-lc-schoenwaelder-2022-11-22-00
This I-D requests to add an entry to the IANA 'Algorithm Type Field'
of the 'IPSECKEY Resource Record Parameters' section. It also suggests
to augment the description of existing entries. Putting things
together, the ID suggests this new content:

   Value  Description                Format description    Reference
   0      No key is present                                [RFC4025]
   1      A DSA Public Key           [RFC2536], Sec. 2     [RFC4025]
   2      A RSA Public Key           [RFC3110], Sec. 2     [RFC4025]
   3      An ECDSA Public Key        [RFC6605], Sec. 4     [RFC4025]

   TBD    An EdDSA Public Key        [RFC8080], Sec. 3     [RFC-TBD]

Checking this against the current IANA registry values, I note that
the current entry for value 3 has [RFC8005] as a reference while the
ID suggests [RFC4025]. Looking at Section 9 of RFC 8005, it seems IANA
has this right and the author got it wrong and this should be:

   Value  Description                Format description    Reference
   0      No key is present                                [RFC4025]
   1      A DSA Public Key           [RFC2536], Sec. 2     [RFC4025]
   2      A RSA Public Key           [RFC3110], Sec. 2     [RFC4025]
   3      An ECDSA Public Key        [RFC6605], Sec. 4     [RFC8005]

   TBD    An EdDSA Public Key        [RFC8080], Sec. 3     [RFC-TBD]