ComputerSurge/bind9
3
0
Fork 0
Code Pull Requests 1 Activity

new draft

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Mark Andrews
2010-08-12 02:30:25 +00:00
parent 75f004c92b
commit 020b3b1379
2 changed files with 448 additions and 504 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

504
doc/draft/draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-05.txt
View File

@@ -1,504 +0,0 @@
DNS Extensions Working Group S. Rose
Internet-Draft NIST
Updates: 2536, 2539, 3110, 4034, June 18, 2010
4398, 5155, 5702
(if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: December 20, 2010
DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY IANA Registry Algorithm Status Addition
draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-05
Abstract
The DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) has an IANA registry to allocate
cryptographic algorithm suites for use in generating digital
signatures over DNS data. Newly introduced cryptographic algorithms
to DNSSEC mean implementors need to know which algorithms need to be
implemented, which are optional, and which are obsolete. This
document adds a column to the IANA registry table for Domain Name
System Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Numbers which lists their current
status for use.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 20, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Terms Used in this Document to Indicate Status . . . . . . 3
1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. DNS Security Algorithm Number Subregistry Fixes . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Individual Fixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Updated Registry Snapshot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Specifying New Algorithms and Updating Status of
Existing Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
1. Introduction
The Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions (DNSSEC) [RFC4033],
[RFC4034], and [RFC4035] uses digital signatures over DNS data to
provide source authentication and integrity protection. DNSSEC uses
an IANA registry to allocate codes for digital signature algorithms
(consisting of a cryptographic algorithm and one-way hash function).
The original list of algorithm status is found in [RFC4034]. Other
DNSSEC documents have added new algorithms or changed the status of
algorithms in the registry. However, implementors must read through
all the documents in order to discover which algorithms are mandatory
to implement and which are optional or no longer used.
This document requests a column to be added to the IANA registry for
Domain Name System Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Numbers. This column
will list the current status of each digital signature algorithm in
the registry at the time of writing and assigns status for algorithms
used with DNSSEC that did not have a status when they were originally
specified. This document updates the following: [RFC2536],
[RFC2539], [RFC3110], [RFC4034], [RFC4398], [RFC5155], [RFC5702], and
[RFCTBD].
1.1. Terms Used in this Document to Indicate Status
The following terms are used within this document to indicate the
current implementation status of the given digital signature
algorithm as of the time of writing. Here, "implementation" refers
to any component (e.g. validator, signer, etc.) that conforms to this
document. Some of these terms were used without definition in
previous documents and are defined here.
MANDATORY: Implementations MUST support this algorithm to be
considered currently inter-operable.
OPTIONAL: Implementation MAY support this algorithm. The presence
or lack thereof this algorithm MUST NOT be used to judge
conformance to this document.
ENCOURAGED: Implementations SHOULD support this algorithm, but
like DISCRETIONARY, lack of support MUST NOT be used to judge
conformance to this document. This term is also used to hint of a
possible status change in the future to MANDATORY.
OBSOLETE: New implementations SHOULD NOT support this algorithm.
These words are also defined in
[I-D.ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words], but the definitions above
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
are used for this document.
1.2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. DNS Security Algorithm Number Subregistry Fixes
The DNS Security Algorithm Number subregistry (part of the Domain
Name System (DNS) Security Number registry) will be modified to
include a new column. This column will contain the current
implementation requirements of the given algorithm. This document
does not make any changes to any other column in the registry table.
There are additional fixes to entries that are described in sub-
section 2.1. The overall new registry table is in sub-section 2.2.
The values for the status were obtained from [RFC4034] with updates
for algorithms specified after the original DNSSEC specification.
The status of algorithms marked OPTIONAL in [RFC4034] are changed to
DISCRETIONARY as defined in
[I-D.ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words]. The status of algorithms
marked NOT RECOMMENDED in [RFC4034] are changed to OBSOLETE as
defined in [I-D.ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words].
2.1. Individual Fixes
This document changes three entries in the Domain Name System
Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Registry. They are:
The description for assignment number 4 is changed to "Reserved until
2020".
The description for assignment number 9 is changed to "Reserved until
2020".
The description for assignment number 11 is changed to "Reserved
until 2020".
Registry entries 13-251 remains Unassigned.
The status of RSASHA1-NSEC3-SHA1 and DSA-NSEC3-SHA1 are both set to
DISCRETIONARY. The status of RSA/SHA-256 and RSA/SHA-512 are set to
ENCOURAGED as it is believed that these algorithms will replace older
algorithms (e.g. RSA/SHA-1) that have a perceived weakness in their
hash algorithm (SHA-1).
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
2.2. Updated Registry Snapshot
As of the current time, the DNS Security Algorithm Number subregistry
would look like the following:
Zone Trans
Number Description Mnem. Sign Sign Status Reference
------ ----------- ------ ---- ----- ------------ ---------
0 Reserved [RFC4398]
1 RSA/MD5 RSAMD5 N Y OBSOLETE [RFC4034],
[RFC3110]
(this memo)
2 Diffie-Hellman DH N Y OPTIONAL [RFC2539]
(this memo)
3 DSA/SHA-1 DSASHA1 Y Y OPTIONAL [RFC2536],
[RFC4034],
FIPS 186-3,
FIPS 180-3
(this memo)
4 Reserved until ECC (this memo)
2020
5 RSA/SHA-1 RSASHA1 Y Y MANDATORY [RFC4034]
(this memo)
6 DSA-NSEC3-SHA1 DSA-NSEC3 Y Y OPTOINAL [RFC5155]
-SHA1 (this memo)
7 RSASHA1-NSEC3 RSASHA1- Y Y OPTIONAL [RFC5155]
-SHA1 NSEC3- (this memo)
SHA1
8 RSA/SHA-256 RSASHA256 Y * ENCOURAGED [RFC5702]
9 Reserved until (this memo)
2020
10 RSA/SHA-512 RSASHA512 Y * ENCOURAGED [RFC5702]
(this memo)
11 Reserved until (this memo)
2020
12 GOST R GOST-ECC Y * OPTIONAL [RFCTBD]
34.10-2001 (this memo)
13-251 Unassigned
252 Reserved for INDIRECT N N OPTIONAL [RFC4034]
Indirect keys (this memo)
253 private PRIVATE Y Y OPTIONAL [RFC4034]
algorithm (this memo)
254 private PRIVATEOID Y Y OPTIONAL [RFC4034]
algorithm OID (this memo)
255 Reserved
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
2.3. Specifying New Algorithms and Updating Status of Existing Entries
[I-D.ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg-allocation] establishes a parallel
procedure for obtaining an algorithm number for new algorithms other
than a standards track document. Algorithms entered into the
registry using that procedure are always OPTIONAL.
Adding a newly specified algorithm to the registry with any status
other than OPTIONAL SHALL entail an update of this document in order
to specify new content to the registry.
Altering the status of any existing algorithm in the registry SHALL
entail an update to this document in order to change the contents of
the registry.
3. IANA Considerations
This document seeks to add a column (titled "Status") to the Domain
Name System (DNS) Security Algorithm Numbers registry to indicate
each algorithm's status for implementations seeking to conform to
this document. The new table is in Section 2.2 and includes the
additional following changes detailed in Section 2.1:
The description of assignment 4 is changed from "Reserved for ECC" to
"Reserved until 2020".
The description of assignment 9 is changed from "Unassigned" to
"Reserved until 2020".
The description for assignment number 11 is changed from "Unassigned"
to "Reserved until 2020".
Registry entries 13-251 remains Unassigned.
The references for current algorithms in the table in Section 2.2
have been updated to remove obsolete RFC's and replaced with the
current reference.
The references to FIPS 180 and FIPS 186 have been updated (to FIPS
180-3 and FIPS 186-3 respectively) to reflect the latest versions.
These revisions are maintenance updates and the relevant content of
the FIPS documents have not changed.
This draft updates the references of the entries that have an
assigned status, in the table in Section 2.2, the text '(this memo)'
should be replaced with the final RFC when published.
The Domain Name System (DNS) Security Algorithm Number registry is
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
available at http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-sec-alg-numbers/
dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml.
4. Security Considerations
This document seeks to add a status column to an existing IANA
registry. It is not meant to be a discussion on algorithm
superiority. No new security considerations are raised in this
document.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg-allocation] Hoffman, P.,
"Cryptographic Algorithm
Identifier Allocation for
DNSSEC", draft-ietf-
dnsext-dnssec-alg-
allocation-03 (work in
progress), March 2010.
[I-D.ogud-iana-protocol-maintenance-words] Gudmundsson, O. and S.
Rose, "Definitions for
expressing standards
requirements in IANA
registries.", draft-ogud-
iana-protocol-
maintenance-words-03
(work in progress),
January 2010.
[RFC.TBD] Dolmatov, V., "Use of
GOST signature algorithms
in DNSKEY and RRSIG
Resource Records for
DNSSEC", draft-ietf-
dnsext-dnssec-gost-07
(work in progress),
March 2010.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words
for use in RFCs to
Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14,
RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2536] Eastlake, D., "DSA KEYs
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
and SIGs in the Domain
Name System (DNS)",
RFC 2536, March 1999.
[RFC2539] Eastlake, D., "Storage of
Diffie-Hellman Keys in
the Domain Name System
(DNS)", RFC 2539,
March 1999.
[RFC3110] Eastlake, D., "RSA/SHA-1
SIGs and RSA KEYs in the
Domain Name System
(DNS)", RFC 3110,
May 2001.
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R.,
Larson, M., Massey, D.,
and S. Rose, "DNS
Security Introduction and
Requirements", RFC 4033,
March 2005.
[RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R.,
Larson, M., Massey, D.,
and S. Rose, "Resource
Records for the DNS
Security Extensions",
RFC 4034, March 2005.
[RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R.,
Larson, M., Massey, D.,
and S. Rose, "Protocol
Modifications for the DNS
Security Extensions",
RFC 4035, March 2005.
[RFC4398] Josefsson, S., "Storing
Certificates in the
Domain Name System
(DNS)", RFC 4398,
March 2006.
[RFC5155] Laurie, B., Sisson, G.,
Arends, R., and D.
Blacka, "DNS Security
(DNSSEC) Hashed
Authenticated Denial of
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes June 2010
Existence", RFC 5155,
March 2008.
[RFC5702] Jansen, J., "Use of SHA-2
Algorithms with RSA in
DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource
Records for DNSSEC",
RFC 5702, October 2009.
5.2. Informative References
[FIPS.180-3.2008] National Institute of
Standards and Technology,
"Secure Hash Standard",
FIPS PUB 180-3,
October 2008, <http://
csrc.nist.gov/
publications/fips/
fips180-3/fips180-3.pdf>.
[FIPS.186-3.2009] National Institute of
Standards and Technology,
"Digital Signature
Standard", FIPS PUB
186-3, June 2009, <http:/
/csrc.nist.gov/
publications/fips/
fips186-3/
fips_186-3.pdf>.
Author's Address
Scott Rose
NIST
100 Bureau Dr.
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
USA
Phone: +1-301-975-8439
EMail: scottr.nist@gmail.com
Rose Expires December 20, 2010 [Page 9]

448
doc/draft/draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-06.txt Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,448 @@
DNS Extensions Working Group S. Rose
Internet-Draft NIST
Updates: 2536, 2539, 3110, 4034, August 11, 2010
4398, 5155, 5702, 5933
(if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: February 12, 2011
Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm IANA
Registry
draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes-06
Abstract
The DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) requires the use of
cryptographic algorithm suites for generating digital signatures over
DNS data. There is currently an IANA registry for these algorithms
that is incomplete in that it lacks the implementation status of each
algorithm. This document provides an applicability statement on
algorithm status for DNSSEC implementations. This document replaces
that registry table with a new IANA registry table for Domain Name
System Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Numbers which lists each
algorithm's status based on the current reference. If that status is
not defined in the original specification, this document assigns a
status.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 12, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. The DNS Security Algorithm Number Subregistry . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Individual Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Domain Name System (DNS) Security Algorithm Number
Registry Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Specifying New Algorithms and Updating Status of
Existing Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
1. Introduction
The Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions (DNSSEC) [RFC4033],
[RFC4034], and [RFC4035] uses digital signatures over DNS data to
provide source authentication and integrity protection. DNSSEC uses
an IANA registry to allocate codes for digital signature algorithms
(consisting of a cryptographic algorithm and one-way hash function).
The original list of algorithm status is found in [RFC4034]. Other
DNSSEC documents have added new algorithms or changed the status of
algorithms in the registry. However, currently implementors must
read through all the documents in order to discover the current
status of each algorithm in the registry.
This document replaces the current IANA registry for Domain Name
System Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Numbers with a newly defined
registry table. This new table (Section 2.2 below) contains a column
that will list the current status of each digital signature algorithm
in the registry at the time of writing and assigns status for some
algorithms used with DNSSEC that did not have an identified status in
their specification. This document updates the following: [RFC2536],
[RFC2539], [RFC3110], [RFC4034], [RFC4398], [RFC5155], [RFC5702], and
[RFC5933].
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. The DNS Security Algorithm Number Subregistry
The DNS Security Algorithm Number subregistry (part of the Domain
Name System (DNS) Security Number registry) will be replaced with the
table below. This table contains a column that contains the current
implementation requirements of the given algorithm.
There are additional differences to entries that are described in
sub-section 2.1. The overall new registry table is in sub-section
2.2. The values for the status were obtained from [RFC4034] with
updates for algorithms specified after the original DNSSEC
specification. If no status was listed in the original
specification, this document assigns one.
2.1. Individual Changes
This document changes three entries in the Domain Name System
Security (DNSSEC) Algorithm Registry. They are:
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
The description for assignment number 4 is changed to "Reserved until
2020".
The description for assignment number 9 is changed to "Reserved until
2020".
The description for assignment number 11 is changed to "Reserved
until 2020".
Registry entries 13-251 remains Unassigned.
The status of RSASHA1-NSEC3-SHA1 and DSA-NSEC3-SHA1 are set to
RECOMMENDED and OPTIONAL respectively. The difference is due to the
fact that RSA/SHA-1 is REQUIRED and DSA/SHA-1 is only OPTIONAL. The
status of RSA/SHA-256 and RSA/SHA-512 are set to RECOMMENDED as it is
believed that these algorithms will replace older algorithms (e.g.
RSA/SHA-1) that have a perceived weakness in their hash algorithm
(SHA-1).
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
2.2. Domain Name System (DNS) Security Algorithm Number Registry Table
The Domain Name System (DNS) Security Algorithm Number registry is
hereby specified as follows:
Zone Transaction
Number Description Mnemonic Sign Sign Status Reference
------ ----------- ------ ---- ----- ------------ ---------
0 Reserved [RFC4398]
1 RSA/MD5 RSAMD5 N Y MUST NOT [RFC4034],
IMPLEMENT [RFC3110]
(this memo)
2 Diffie-Hellman DH N Y [RFC2539]
(this memo)
3 DSA/SHA-1 DSASHA1 Y Y [RFC2536],
[RFC4034],
FIPS 186-3,
FIPS 180-3
(this memo)
4 Reserved until ECC (this memo)
2020
5 RSA/SHA-1 RSASHA1 Y Y REQUIRED [RFC4034]
(this memo)
6 DSA-NSEC3-SHA1 DSA-NSEC3 Y Y [RFC5155]
-SHA1 (this memo)
7 RSASHA1-NSEC3 RSASHA1- Y Y RECOMMENDED [RFC5155]
-SHA1 NSEC3- (this memo)
SHA1
8 RSA/SHA-256 RSASHA256 Y * RECOMMENDED [RFC5702]
(this memo)
9 Reserved until (this memo)
2020
10 RSA/SHA-512 RSASHA512 Y * RECOMMENDED [RFC5702]
(this memo)
11 Reserved until (this memo)
2020
12 GOST R GOST-ECC Y * [RFC5933]
34.10-2001 (this memo)
13-251 Unassigned
252 Reserved for INDIRECT N N [RFC4034]
Indirect keys (this memo)
253 private PRIVATE Y Y [RFC4034]
algorithm (this memo)
254 private PRIVATEOID Y Y [RFC4034]
algorithm OID (this memo)
255 Reserved
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
2.3. Specifying New Algorithms and Updating Status of Existing Entries
[I-D.ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg-allocation] establishes a parallel
procedure for obtaining an algorithm number for new algorithms other
than a standards track document. Algorithms entered into the
registry using that procedure do not have a listed status.
Specifications that follow this path do not need to obsolete or
update this document.
Adding a newly specified algorithm to the registry with a status
SHALL entail obsoleting this document and replacing the registry
table (with the new algorithm entry). Altering the status column
value of any existing algorithm in the registry SHALL entail
obsoleting this document and replacing the registry table.
This document cannot be updated, only made obsolete and replaced by a
successor document.
3. IANA Considerations
This document replaces the Domain Name System (DNS) Security
Algorithm Numbers registry. The new registry table is in Section
2.2.
The original Domain Name System (DNS) Security Algorithm Number
registry is available at http://www.iana.org/assignments/
dns-sec-alg-numbers/dns-sec-alg-numbers.xhtml.
4. Security Considerations
This document replaces the Domain Name System (DNS) Security
Algorithm Numbers registry. It is not meant to be a discussion on
algorithm superiority. No new security considerations are raised in
this document.
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg-allocation] Hoffman, P., "Cryptographic
Algorithm Identifier
Allocation for DNSSEC", draf
t-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-alg-
allocation-03 (work in
progress), March 2010.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for
use in RFCs to Indicate
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
Requirement Levels", BCP 14,
RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2536] Eastlake, D., "DSA KEYs and
SIGs in the Domain Name
System (DNS)", RFC 2536,
March 1999.
[RFC2539] Eastlake, D., "Storage of
Diffie-Hellman Keys in the
Domain Name System (DNS)",
RFC 2539, March 1999.
[RFC3110] Eastlake, D., "RSA/SHA-1
SIGs and RSA KEYs in the
Domain Name System (DNS)",
RFC 3110, May 2001.
[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R.,
Larson, M., Massey, D., and
S. Rose, "DNS Security
Introduction and
Requirements", RFC 4033,
March 2005.
[RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R.,
Larson, M., Massey, D., and
S. Rose, "Resource Records
for the DNS Security
Extensions", RFC 4034,
March 2005.
[RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R.,
Larson, M., Massey, D., and
S. Rose, "Protocol
Modifications for the DNS
Security Extensions",
RFC 4035, March 2005.
[RFC4398] Josefsson, S., "Storing
Certificates in the Domain
Name System (DNS)",
RFC 4398, March 2006.
[RFC5155] Laurie, B., Sisson, G.,
Arends, R., and D. Blacka,
"DNS Security (DNSSEC)
Hashed Authenticated Denial
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IANA Registry Fixes August 2010
of Existence", RFC 5155,
March 2008.
[RFC5702] Jansen, J., "Use of SHA-2
Algorithms with RSA in
DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource
Records for DNSSEC",
RFC 5702, October 2009.
[RFC5933] Dolmatov, V., Chuprina, A.,
and I. Ustinov, "Use of GOST
Signature Algorithms in
DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource
Records for DNSSEC",
RFC 5933, July 2010.
5.2. Informative References
[FIPS.180-3.2008] National Institute of
Standards and Technology,
"Secure Hash Standard",
FIPS PUB 180-3,
October 2008, <http://
csrc.nist.gov/publications/
fips/fips180-3/
fips180-3.pdf>.
[FIPS.186-3.2009] National Institute of
Standards and Technology,
"Digital Signature
Standard", FIPS PUB 186-3,
June 2009, <http://
csrc.nist.gov/publications/
fips/fips186-3/
fips_186-3.pdf>.
Author's Address
Scott Rose
NIST
100 Bureau Dr.
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
USA
Phone: +1-301-975-8439
EMail: scottr.nist@gmail.com
Rose Expires February 12, 2011 [Page 8]