Re: further pushing ed25519 sshfp

FYI, based on last night's (in my TZ;-) CFRG session I'll
be starting an IETF LC for SM's draft. Be great to get any
comments on that if you have 'em

Ta,
S.

On 28/04/14 17:49, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hi James,
> At 07:54 27-04-2014, James Cloos wrote:
>> Can we get an early assignment for algo 4 for ed25519?
>>
>> We have the draft, software which wants to use it, and nothing competing
>> for algo 4.  An early assignment should not be controversial.
> 
> I raised the question of the assignment at
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg87189.html There
> were replies from Jari Arkko and Stephen Farrell at:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg87222.html
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg87220.html
> 
> The CFRG meeting is tomorrow (
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg04448.html ).  It
> should be possible to have an answer within a day or two.
> 
>> As to the other question, a draft to un-reserve digest type 0 instead to
>> be "raw" would eliminate the issue of whether 256 bit keys should use a
>> 256 bit digest.  Admins could decide for themselves.
>>
>> Using 0 for raw is natural; "the null-digest" akin to "the null-cipher".
> 
> I mentioned that I will be writing a draft a SSHFP issue which was
> raised during the discussions.  I'll include the above as part of the
> (future) discussion.  I need to cover over the IETF RFCs again to see
> what needs to be done.  I am focusing on the assignment first as it
> should be possible to get an IESG decision by end of May.
> 
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
> 
>