Q-5: DNS Security Algorithm Number 252 to reserved ?

[Roy Arends <roy@logmess.com>]

Q: Can we move KEY Algorithm Number 252 status "reserved for indirect
keys" to "reserved" ?

Some background:

RFC2535 says <text irrelevant to question is omitted>:

3.2 The KEY Algorithm Number Specification

   VALUE   Algorithm

   252     reserved for indirect keys

   Algorithm number 252 indicates an indirect key format where the
   actual key material is elsewhere.  This format is to be defined in a
   separate document.

Input for discussion:

In the years between RFC 2535 and this message, no specification of
indirect keys have matured to standards track.

The intended usage of indirect keys was for appliction keys. RFC 3445
limited the KEY record to DNSSEC keys only.

Should Algorithm number 252 remain "reserved for indirect keys", or
should the revised specs move it to "reserved" ?

Roy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>