To:
Jakob Schlyter <jakob@crt.se>, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>
Cc:
Ed Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>, <keydist@cafax.se>
From:
Ólafur Guðmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
Date:
Mon, 30 Sep 2002 11:48:30 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.OSX.4.44.0209301635350.568-100000@criollo.schlyter.pp.se>
Sender:
owner-keydist@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: BoF slot applied for...
At 10:37 2002-09-30, Jakob Schlyter wrote: >On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Michael Richardson wrote: > > > Jakob> no, I think we should hold until we've have more experience > with actual > > Jakob> deployment of the things, like sshfp and ipseckey, people > are working on. > > > > It is not clear to me how those items can even advance. > >I can not see any reason why ssh would be pushed forward as experimental s/would/would NOT/ s/as/as at least/ >by the secsh wg. The ipseckey record can go forward as soon as there is consensus on the format and contents. Summary: sshfp is a minimalist record that only provides key footprint. ipseckey is on the other extreme including other information that IPSEC protocol entities can use. Both types of <keying> records have a place and we should play with both. Olafur