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