Subject: [Cfrg] Using ED25519 in SSHFP Resource Records - draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-01

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 09:32:47 -0700

Hello,

I posted a message previously about using ED25519 in SSHFP Resource 
Records ( 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg04200.html 
).  It would help if I could get some feedback from CFRG about 
draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-01 ( 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-01 ).

Thanks,
S. Moonesamy

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 17:41:41 +0100

Hiya,

SM asked me to AD sponsor this and I'll be happy to
consider that once I think that doing so won't conflict
with other work on 25519 related stuff. So comments
from that angle would be useful for me,

Thanks,
S.

On 04/01/2014 05:32 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg04200.html ).  It
> would help if I could get some feedback from CFRG about
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
> 
>

---

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 12:47:15 -0400

> SM asked me to AD sponsor this and I'll be happy to consider that once I think that doing so won't conflict with other work on 25519 related stuff. So comments from that angle would be useful for me,

The in-progress bits I know about are representation of a Curve25519 public key.  Since these documents only publish the digest of a key being used in a particular signature type, I see no conflict in that area.  Are there other places that need to define an Ed25519 algorithm identifier? Can they just use the one assigned here?  I don't know and I don't know. 

	/r$

--  
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technology
Cambridge, MA

---

From: Watson Ladd <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 09:53:20 -0700

> I posted a message previously about using ED25519 in SSHFP Resource
Records ( http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg04200.html).
 It would help if I could get some feedback from CFRG about
draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-01 (
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-01 ).

I don't see anything for CFRG. The SHA256 hash of a string of bytes
identifies that string. I assume Ed255 19 in SSH is defined elsewhere, and
I can trust the OpenSSH people to do things right. So from a crypto
perspective it looks fine to me.