Re: Updated RSA SHA-2 draft / New draft: SSH Extension Negotiation

denis bider <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.secsh
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Oh; thanks for the clarification. We never implemented SSHv1, so I haven't been exposed to that.

The public key format used by the "rsa-sha2-XXXX" signature algorithms remains "ssh-rsa", so I think that distinction will remain, to the extent it is needed.


Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email protected]> , 11/8/2015 3:09 AM:
On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 02:30 +0000, denis bider wrote: 
> The "ecdsa-sha2-..." algorithm names (RFC 5656) do not use the "ssh-" prefix. 
>  
> Neither do the new formats in RFC 6187, i.e. "x509v3-rsa2048-sha256" and "x509v3-ecdsa-sha2-...". 
>  
> In my opinion, the "ssh-" prefix is superfluous. The context of SSH is 
> implied by where the names are used. 
 
It's superfluous except for "ssh-rsa" and "ssh-dsa", where it serves in 
various out-of-protocol contexts to distinguish between these and the 
corresponding SSHv1 key types. 
 
 
 
> The prefix would make sense if it were needed to disambiguate from 
> something. However, I am not aware of any proposal for SSH to do a 
> wholesale import of algorithm names from some other, SSH-unaware spec. 
> Moreover, if such names were imported, then THOSE names would be 
> prefixed with something, not the SSH native algorithm names. 
 
Right, agreed.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.