Bob Harold <[email protected]> writes: > I support this.
Hi Bob, Thanks for the support and the bugs. Inline below: > It sounds like future updates will be separate RFC documents, so it seems odd > to say > 'this document' in 1.3. Perhaps "future documents" ? (I assume this text > was just > copied from the previous version.) Good point, thanks. Updated. > 1.3. Updating Algorithm Requirement Levels > ... > This document attempts to identify and introduce those algorithms for > future mandatory-to-implement status. ... > Published algorithms are continuously subjected to > cryptographic attack and may become too weak, or even be completely > broken, before this document is updated. I changed this significantly to: By the time a DNSSEC cryptographic algorithm is made mandatory-to-implement, it should already be available in most implementations. This document defines an IANA registration modification to allow future documents to specify the implementation recommendations for each algorithm as the recommendation status of each DNSSEC cryptographic algorithm is expected to change over time. For example, there is no guarantee that newly introduced algorithms will become mandatory to implement in the future. Likewise, published algorithms are continuously subjected to cryptographic attack and may become too weak, or even be completely broken, and will require deprecation in the future. > Typographical cleanup: > > In "3. DNS System Algorithm Numbers Column Values", > what was "table 1" should probably be "table 2" both in the text and > under the table. Yep, fixed. Thanks. > The table heading two rows should probably be a single row? With > "Recommended for DNSSEC Signing" in a single cell, and "Recommended > for DNSSEC Validation" in a single cell. And row 10 in the table > appears to be split. "NOT RECOMMENDED" should be a single cell. Well, this is an artifact of markdown conversion because they aren't separate cells -- they're one cell with dividers in markdown. I'll work on fixing that, thanks. (insert mandatory sigh here) > In "4. DNSSEC Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest > Algorithms Column Values" > > It should be "table 3" in the text and under the table. Fixed > And the header for each page has a placeholder "title" instead of the > actual title. Yep, now: title: "DNSSEC Cryptographic Algorithm Recommendation Update Process" abbrev: "DNSSEC Algorithms Update Process" -- Wes Hardaker USC/ISI _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
