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.