Subject: Re: OPS-DIR Review of draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 04:57:36 -0700

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the review.

At 04:11 27-05-2014, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
>This document  Informational RFC status. It extends the IANA "SSHFP 
>RR Types for public key algorithms" registry by adding an algorithm 
>number for Ed25519. There are no manageability or operational 
>implications related to this document. None of the checklist items 
>listed in RFC 5706 apply.
>
>A number of nits will be easily corrected by the RFC Editor:
>
>-          [RFC6594] is not referred in the document in the 
>bracketed format, resulting into a 'reference not used' error

I wanted to credit Ondrej Sury for his work, hence the reference.  I 
removed the reference  while keeping the credit as the reference 
would not be of interest to the reader.

>-          [FIPS180-4] is listed as a Normative Reference but not used

I already moved that to an Informative Reference in my working copy.

>-          Ed25519 and ED25519 are inconsistently used in the 
>document. I recommend settling on one way to write it.

That may be because of the "ED25519 Public Key with SHA-256 
Fingerprint" in Section 2.  I think that it is better to leave it as 
such to be consistent with the IANA Considerations Section.  The RFC 
Editor will likely flag this inconsistency.  Please feel free to push 
back on my response as it keeps things easier down the line.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy