Re: [DNSOP] what i said at the mic (re: dnssec-key-timing)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Johan Ihren wrote: > > I don't remember exactly what I said, but what I meant was not that > "double signature" is sufficient to accomplish an algorithm rollover, > only that it was needed as part of one. So I think you and I agree hee. > I think so

Re: [DNSOP] what i said at the mic (re: dnssec-key-timing) (fwd)

Sorry, forgot to copy the list ... - Forwarded message - > From: Alfred Hönes > To: joh...@autonomica.se, je...@isc.org > Message-Id: <200911161039.laa16...@tr-sys.de> > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:39:09 +0100 (MEZ) > Subject: Re: [DNSOP] what i said at the mic (

Re: [DNSOP] what i said at the mic (re: dnssec-key-timing)

Hi Jelte, On 11 Nov 2009, at 09:42, Jelte Jansen wrote: the slide that mentioned algorithm rollover mentioned it at a diagram of double-signature rolls, which will probably not be sufficient for that, see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop- rfc4641bis-01#section-4.2.4 I don't reme

[DNSOP] what i said at the mic (re: dnssec-key-timing)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, the slide that mentioned algorithm rollover mentioned it at a diagram of double-signature rolls, which will probably not be sufficient for that, see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-01#section-4.2.4 (btw i agree with olaf t