Re: [DNSOP] [Curdle] WGLC on draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-01

Simon, thanks for all the comments, I have now culled all the context usage from the draft and the git version should be up to date and ready for -2 upload. Cheers, Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý -- Technical Fellow CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.-- Laboratoře CZ.

Re: [DNSOP] [Curdle] WGLC on draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-01

And now the examples section contains Ed448 examples as well generated using eddsa2.py from [CFRG-EDDSA] draft. I think now the draft is as good as it gets. Thanks all for providing guidance. O. -- Ondřej Surý -- Technical Fellow CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.

Re: [DNSOP] IETF97 - dnsop meeting

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 06:54:51AM -0700, Tim Wicinski wrote a message of 20 lines which said: > We've been given a 2 hour slot on Tuesday at 13:30 local time (after lunch). The agenda is quite... sketchy. For instance, will we have a di

Re: [DNSOP] IETF97 - dnsop meeting

Hi Apologies, I've been in work planning meetings all week for my employer. When I get home tomorrow morning I was going to spend some time to update the meeting materials. tim On 11/4/16 6:11 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 06:54:51AM -0700, Tim Wicinski wrote a

Re: [DNSOP] [Curdle] WGLC on draft-ietf-curdle-dnskey-eddsa-01

Thanks for the update. I think that woudl be helpful to have some text that provides some rational for using Ed25519 versus Ed25519ph and Ed25519ctx as well as Ed448 versus Ed448ph. I belive that is collision resilience as well as offline signing in which case double path does not really matter.