Subject: [Trans] [Public Notary Transparency Wiki] #189: Permit logs to use EdDSA

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:08:42 -0000

#189: Permit logs to use EdDSA
-----------------------------+--------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  rob.stradling@…  |      Owner:  draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@…
     Type:  enhancement      |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major            |  Milestone:
Component:  rfc6962-bis      |    Version:
 Severity:  -                |   Keywords:
-----------------------------+--------------------------------------------
 The specification for EdDSA was published as RFC8032 a few months ago.
 The advantages of EdDSA over ECDSA are summarized at
 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8032#section-1

 We should add one or more of the EdDSA Instances to the Signature
 Algorithms registry.

 Expert advice on which of the EdDSA Instances to add would be appreciated.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/trans/ticket/189>
Public Notary Transparency  Wiki <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/trans>
My example project

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 11:35:41 -0000

#189: Permit logs to use EdDSA
-----------------------------+---------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  rob.stradling@…  |       Owner:  draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@…
     Type:  enhancement      |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major            |   Milestone:
Component:  rfc6962-bis      |     Version:
 Severity:  -                |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                   |
-----------------------------+---------------------------------------------

Comment (by eranm@…):

 From what I understand (consulting with a few Google engineers who
 actually know crypto), EdDSA is supported in BoringSSL and there's no
 reason not to support it in 6962-bis.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/trans/ticket/189#comment:1>
Public Notary Transparency  Wiki <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/trans>
My example project