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

[email protected] (Niels Möller)
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.secsh
Message-ID <[email protected]>
denis bider <[email protected]> writes:

> 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.

The "ssh-" prefix specifies the encoding to use for keys and signatures.
My understanding is that for ecdsa- and x509v3-, the encoding is
specified by appropiate other standards. While for ssh-rsa and ssh-dss,
the encoding is ssh-specific: It is specified in the ssh transport
protocol (RFC 4253), and include strings like "ssh-rsa" as part of the
encoding.

I belive the new rsa-sha2-256 algorithm name ought to also have an
"ssh-" prefix, because the format is equally ssh specific.

> I think the use of "ssh-" prefixes for all kinds of names was a
> (small) mistake in the original design.

I disagree. And even if it were a small mistake, we should strive to
keep naming consistent.

Regards,
/Niels

-- 
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.
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.