Hi!
Then, what should we do? If we change the intended status to standards
track, will it be ok? Will it require more steps to get it approved?
Can we possibly get the draft approved as an informational RFC?
--
Boris
18.10.2022 17:58, Ron Even пишет:
Hi, your response does not address my comments. 1. whis is this an > informational RFC and not a standard track RFC. 2. What is requested
> from IANA. ths text you wrote and I copied is not a directive to >
IANA that is clear Roni > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 2:44 PM Макаренко
Борис > <bmakare...@tcinet.ru <mailto:bmakare...@tcinet.ru>> wrote: > >
Hello, Roni! > > The old algorithms GOST R 34.11-94, GOST R 34.10-2001
and GOST R > 34.11-2001 are considered obsolete. They are now replaced
with GOST > R 34.10-2012 (digital signature) and GOST R 34.11-2012 (hash
> function). Basically, the use of GOST algorithms in DNSSEC remains >
the same as described in RFC 5933, but it is necessary to replace > them
with the new ones. Old algorithms should not be used anymore. > That's
why we need to obsolete RFC 5933. > > The section "IANA Considerations"
proposes to assign numbers for > GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012
in the IANA registries "DNS > Security Algorithm Numbers" >
(https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers/dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml
> >
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers/dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml>)
and "Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest > Algorithms" >
(https://www.iana.org/assignments/ds-rr-types/ds-rr-types.xhtml >
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/ds-rr-types/ds-rr-types.xhtml>). > >
Updates for RFC 8624 are described in the corresponding Section. > > --
Boris > > > 13.10.2022 14:41, Roni Even via Datatracker writes: >>
Reviewer: Roni Even Review result: Almost Ready >> >> I am the assigned
Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General >> Area Review Team
(Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being >> processed by the IESG for
the IETF Chair. Please treat these >> comments just like any other last
call comments. >> >> For more information, please see the FAQ at >> >>
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq> >>
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >> >> Document:
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-?? Reviewer: Roni Even >> Review Date:
2022-10-13 IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-19 IESG Telechat >> date: Not
scheduled for a telechat >> >> Summary: the document is almost ready for
publication as some type >> of an RFC >> >> Major issues: The document
is meant to be an informational RFC >> obsoleting RFC5933 a standard
track RFC. why is this change. >> >> Minor issues: >> >> the directive
in the IANA consideration "The entry for Value 3, >> GOST R 34.11-94
should be updated to have its Status changed to >> '-'" is not clear.
there is no status field in the table as I see >> in RFC8624 section 3.3
>> >> Nits/editorial comments: >> >> >> >> >_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
