To:
Havard Eidnes <he@runit.no>
Cc:
<ogud@ogud.com>, <dnssec@cafax.se>, <sra@hactrn.net>
From:
Jakob Schlyter <jakob@crt.se>
Date:
Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:22:10 +0200 (CEST)
Delivery-Date:
Thu Apr 26 08:16:44 2001
In-Reply-To:
<20010426001348E.he@runit.no>
Sender:
owner-dnssec@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Keys at apex problem - New PUBKEY RR?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Havard Eidnes wrote: > > 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". yes, SRV is used that way. the questions is whether we should name the KEY owner name the same way, i.e. is there a need for different keys for the same application but with different protocols (e.g. different key for ssh/tcp vs ssh/udp). /Jakob -- Jakob Schlyter <jakob@crt.se> Network Analyst Phone: +46 31 701 42 13, +46 70 595 07 94 Carlstedt Research & Technology