To:
jakob@crt.se
Cc:
ogud@ogud.com, dnssec@cafax.se, sra@hactrn.net
From:
Havard Eidnes <he@runit.no>
Date:
Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:13:48 +0200
Delivery-Date:
Thu Apr 26 08:16:43 2001
In-Reply-To:
Your message of "Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:04:51 +0200 (CEST)"<Pine.BSO.4.33.0104252358100.24513-100000@fonbella.crt.se>
Sender:
owner-dnssec@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Keys at apex problem - New PUBKEY RR?
> > >$origin east.isi.edu. > > >@ IN SOA ... > > >@ NS ... > > >@ A 38.245.76.2 > > >@ KEY <zone key> > > >_ssh._tcp SRV 0 0 @ > > >_ssh._tcp KEY <ssh host key material> > > > > or it could be > > _ssh._tcp SRV 0 0 ssh-key-name > > and key would be stored at ssh-key-name ... > > using _ssh._tcp KEY seems cleaner, but I don't really see why > we would need the protocol in the owner name. do applications > have different keys for different protocols? if so, this could > be useful. That's how SRV keys are named. Quoting RFC 2782: Here is the format of the SRV RR, whose DNS type code is 33: _Service._Proto.Name TTL Class SRV Priority Weight Port Target and the following sections define "Service" and "Proto". Regards, - Håvard