< draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-iana-cons-00.txt		draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-iana-cons-01.txt >
	Network Working Group P. Hoffman		Network Working Group P. Hoffman
	Internet-Draft ICANN		Internet-Draft ICANN
	Updates: 3658, 5155, 6014, 8624 (if approved) 22 January 2021		Updates: 3658, 5155, 6014, 8624 (if July 21, 2021
			approved)
	Intended status: Standards Track		Intended status: Standards Track
	Expires: 26 July 2021		Expires: January 22, 2022
	Revised IANA Considerations for DNSSEC		Revised IANA Considerations for DNSSEC
	draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-iana-cons-00		draft-ietf-dnsop-dnssec-iana-cons-01
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document changes the review requirements needed to get some		This document changes the review requirements needed to get some
	DNSSEC algorithms and resource records added to IANA registries. It		DNSSEC algorithms and resource records added to IANA registries. It
	updates RFC 6014 to include hash algorithms for DS records and NSEC3		updates RFC 6014 to include hash algorithms for DS records and NSEC3
	parameters. It also updates RFC 5155 and RFC 6014, which have		parameters. It also updates RFC 5155 and RFC 6014, which have
	requirements for DNSSEC algorithms. It also updates RFC 8624 to say		requirements for DNSSEC algorithms. It also updates RFC 8624 to say
	that algorithms that are described in RFCs that are not on standards		that algorithms that are described in RFCs that are not on standards
	track are only at the "MAY" level of implementation recommendation.		track are only at the "MAY" level of implementation recommendation.
			The rationale for these changes is to bring the requirements for DS
			records and for the hash algorithms used in NSEC3 in line with the
			requirements for all other DNSSEC algorithms.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on 26 July 2021.		This Internet-Draft will expire on January 22, 2022.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.		(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
			described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Update to RFC 6014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		2. Update to RFC 6014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	3. Update to RFC 8624 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. Update to RFC 8624 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	DNSSEC is primarily described in [RFC4033], [RFC4034], and [RFC4035].		DNSSEC is primarily described in [RFC4033], [RFC4034], and [RFC4035].
	DNSSEC commonly uses two resource records beyond those defined in RFC		DNSSEC commonly uses two resource records beyond those defined in RFC
	4034: DS [RFC3658] and NSEC3 [RFC5155].		4034: DS [RFC3658] and NSEC3 [RFC5155].
	[RFC8126] describes the requirements for listing in the myriad IANA		[RFC8126] describes the requirements for listing in the myriad IANA
	registries.		registries.
	[RFC6014] updated the requirements for how DNSSEC cryptographic		[RFC6014] updated the requirements for how DNSSEC cryptographic
	algorithm identifiers in the IANA registries are allocated, reducing		algorithm identifiers in the IANA registries are allocated, reducing
	the requirements from being "Standards Action" to "RFC Required".		the requirements from being "Standards Action" to "RFC Required".
	However, the IANA registry requirements for hash algorithms for DS		However, the IANA registry requirements for hash algorithms for DS
	records and for the hash algorithms used in NSEC3 are still		records and for the hash algorithms used in NSEC3 are still
	"Standards Action".		"Standards Action".
	2. Update to RFC 6014		2. Update to RFC 6014
	This document updates RFC 6014 to bring the requirements for DS		Section 4 updates RFC 6014 to bring the requirements for DS records
	records and NSEC3 hash algorithms in line with the rest of the DNSSEC		and NSEC3 hash algorithms in line with the rest of the DNSSEC
	cryptographic algorithms by allowing any DS or NSEC3 hash algorithms		cryptographic algorithms by allowing any DS or NSEC3 hash algorithms
	that are fully described in an RFC to have identifiers allocated in		that are fully described in an RFC to have identifiers allocated in
	the IANA registries.		the IANA registries. This is an addition to the IANA considerations
			in RFC 6014.
	3. Update to RFC 8624		3. Update to RFC 8624
	This document updates [RFC8624] for all DNSKEY and DS algorithms that		This document updates [RFC8624] for all DNSKEY and DS algorithms that
	are not on standards track.		are not on standards track.
	The second paragraph of Section 1.2 of RFC 8624 currently says:		The second paragraph of Section 1.2 of RFC 8624 currently says:
	This document only provides recommendations with respect to		This document only provides recommendations with respect to
	mandatory-to-implement algorithms or algorithms so weak that they		mandatory-to-implement algorithms or algorithms so weak that they
	skipping to change at page 3, line 31 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 31 ¶
	This document provides recommendations with respect to mandatory-to-		This document provides recommendations with respect to mandatory-to-
	implement algorithms, algorithms so weak that they cannot be		implement algorithms, algorithms so weak that they cannot be
	recommended, and algorithms that are defined in RFCs that are not on		recommended, and algorithms that are defined in RFCs that are not on
	standards track. Any algorithm listed in the [DNSKEY-IANA] and [DS-		standards track. Any algorithm listed in the [DNSKEY-IANA] and [DS-
	IANA] registries that are not mentioned in this document MAY be		IANA] registries that are not mentioned in this document MAY be
	implemented. For clarification and consistency, an algorithm will be		implemented. For clarification and consistency, an algorithm will be
	specified as MAY in this document only when it has been downgraded		specified as MAY in this document only when it has been downgraded
	from a MUST or a RECOMMENDED to a MAY.		from a MUST or a RECOMMENDED to a MAY.
			This update is also reflected in the IANA considerations in
			Section 4.
	4. IANA Considerations		4. IANA Considerations
	In the "Domain Name System Security (DNSSEC) NextSECure3 (NSEC3)		In the "Domain Name System Security (DNSSEC) NextSECure3 (NSEC3)
	Parameters" registry, the registration procedure for "DNSSEC NSEC3		Parameters" registry, the registration procedure for "DNSSEC NSEC3
	Flags", "DNSSEC NSEC3 Hash Algorithms", and "DNSSEC NSEC3PARAM Flags"		Flags", "DNSSEC NSEC3 Hash Algorithms", and "DNSSEC NSEC3PARAM Flags"
	are changed from "Standards Action" to "RFC Required".		are changed from "Standards Action" to "RFC Required".
	In the "Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest		In the "Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest
	Algorithms" registry, the registration procedure for "Digest		Algorithms" registry, the registration procedure for "Digest
	Algorithms" is changed from "Standards Action" to "RFC Required".		Algorithms" is changed from "Standards Action" to "RFC Required".
End of changes. 11 change blocks.
	17 lines changed or deleted		26 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/