On 8/10/22 16:45, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Aug 10, 2022, at 16:07, Robert Moskowitz <rgm-...@htt-consult.com>
wrote:
On 8/10/22 16:04, Paul Wouters wrote:
Robert Moskowitz<rgm-...@htt-consult.com> wrote:
I think I could have the IANA Considerations have a fix for 1 - 3 as
well as add 4.
Please do. I talked to IANA and they agreed this was the easiest solution.
Should it be:
* public key
* Public key
* Public Key
My preference is Public Key but I don’t feel strongly at all - either
of these are fine for me.
It is all about is it a Proper Noun or not.
Well, in the end, it will be up to the RFC Editor! :)
Here goes:
Looks good, thanks !
Paul
4.1. IANA IPSECKEY Registry Update
This document requests IANA to clarify the text in the "Algorithm
Type Field" subregistry of the "IPSECKEY Resource Record Parameters"
[IANA-IPSECKEY] registry to explicitly state this is for "Public"
keys:
Value Description Reference
1 A DSA Public key is present, in the format defined in
[RFC2536] [RFC4025]
2 A RSA Public key is present, in the format defined in
[RFC3110] [RFC4025]
3 An ECDSA Public key is present, in the format defined in
[RFC6605] [RFC8005]
Futher, this document requests IANA to make the following addition to
the "IPSECKEY Resource Record Parameters" [IANA-IPSECKEY] registry:
IPSECKEY:
This document defines the new IPSECKEY value TBD1 (suggested: 4)
(Section 3) in the "Algorithm Type Field" subregistry of the
"IPSECKEY Resource Record Parameters" registry.
Value Description Reference
TBD1 (suggested value 4) [This]
An EdDSA Public key is present, in the format defined
in [RFC8080]
==================
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
