Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6944 (4932)

A reference to RFC 6944 to the whole registry, or the entry for RSA/MD5? 
  There is a ref for the whole table, but not the entry. If this a 
proposed change to the entry, I agree with the change.

Scott



On 12 Feb 2017, at 8:47, RFC Errata System wrote:

> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6944,
> "Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm 
> Implementation Status".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6944&eid=4932
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Petr Spacek <[email protected]>
>
> Section: 3
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>    This document lists the implementation status of cryptographic
>    algorithms used with DNSSEC.  These algorithms are maintained in an
>    IANA registry at 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers.
>    Because this document establishes the implementation status of 
> every
>    algorithm, it has been listed as a reference for the registry 
> itself.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>    This document lists the implementation status of cryptographic
>    algorithms used with DNSSEC.  These algorithms are maintained in an
>    IANA registry at 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers.
>    Because this document establishes the implementation status of 
> every
>    algorithm, it has been listed as a reference for the registry 
> itself.
>
>    Given significance of status change of RSAMD5 algorithm, a 
> reference
>    to this RFC should be added to the registry.
>
> Notes
> -----
> "RSAMD5 has an implementation status of Must Not Implement because of 
> known weaknesses in MD5."
>
> This is very important. An additional reference would lower likelihood 
> that DNS Implementors will overlook the important piece of 
> information.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6944 (draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-04)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) 
> DNSKEY Algorithm Implementation Status
> Publication Date    : April 2013
> Author(s)           : S. Rose
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : DNS Extensions
> Area                : Internet
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG


==================================
Scott Rose, NIST
[email protected]
ph: +1-301-975-8439
Google Voice: +1-571-249-3671

_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext