[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-srose-dnssec-algo-imp-status) 00 01 02 03 04 RFC 6944

DNS Extensions Working Group                                     S. Rose
Internet-Draft                                                      NIST
Updates: 2536, 2539, 3110, 4034, 4398,                    March 26, 2012
5155, 5702, 5933 (if approved)
Intended status: BCP
Expires: September 27, 2012


    Applicability Statement: DNS Security (DNSSEC) DNSKEY Algorithm
                         Implementation Status
              draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-imp-status-01

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 recommended implementation
   status of each algorithm.  This document provides an applicability
   statement on algorithm implementation status for DNSSEC component
   software.  This document lists each algorithm's status based on the
   current reference.  In the case that an algorithm is specified
   without an implementation status, this document assigns one.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 27, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 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



Rose                   Expires September 27, 2012               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft              Algorithm-Status                  March 2012


   (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 Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

   2.  The DNS Security Algorithm Implementation Status Lists  . . . . 3
     2.1.  Algorithm Implementation Status Assignement Rationale . . . 3
     2.2.  DNSSEC Implementation Status Table  . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.3.  Specifying New Algorithms and Updating Status of
           Existing Entries  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

   5.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     5.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     5.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

























Rose                   Expires September 27, 2012               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft              Algorithm-Status                  March 2012


1.  Introduction

   The Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions (DNSSEC) [RFC4033],
   [RFC4034], [RFC4035], [RFC4509], [RFC5155], and [RFC5702] uses
   digital signatures over DNS data to provide source authentication and
   integrity protection.  DNSSEC uses an IANA registry to list 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 RFC's have added new algorithms or changed the status of
   algorithms in the registry.  However, implementers must read through
   all the documents in order to discover which algorithms are
   considered wise to implement, which are not, and which algorithms may
   become widely used in the future.  This document includes the current
   implementation status for certain algorithms.

   This implementation status indication is only to be considered for
   implementation, not deployment or operations.  Operators are free to
   deploy any digital signature algorithm available in implementations
   or algorithms chosen by local security policies.  This status is to
   measure compliance to this document only.

   This document updates the following: [RFC2536], [RFC2539], [RFC3110],
   [RFC4034], [RFC4398], [RFC5155], [RFC5702], and [RFC5933].

1.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "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 Implementation Status Lists

2.1.  Algorithm Implementation Status Assignement Rationale

   The status of RSASHA1-NSEC3-SHA1 is set to RECOMMENDED TO IMPLEMENT
   as major deployments (such as the root zone) use NSEC3 [ROOTDPS].
   The status of RSA/SHA-256 and RSA/SHA-512 are also set to RECOMMENDED
   TO IMPLEMENT as it is believed that these algorithms will replace an
   older algorithm (e.g.  RSA/SHA-1) that have a perceived weakness in
   its hash algorithm (SHA-1) as well as seen in major deployments.

   All other algorithms used in DNSSEC specified without an
   implementation status are currently set to OPTIONAL.






Rose                   Expires September 27, 2012               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft              Algorithm-Status                  March 2012


2.2.  DNSSEC Implementation Status Table

   The DNSSEC algorithm implementation status table is listed below.
   Only the algorithms already specified for use with DNSSEC (at the
   time of writing) are listed.


    +------------+------------+-----------------+-------------------+
    |    MUST    |  MUST NOT  |   RECOMMENDED   |      OPTIONAL     |
    |  IMPLEMENT | IMPLEMENT  |  TO IMPLEMENT   |                   |
    +------------+------------+-----------------+-------------------+
    |            |            |                 |                   |
    |   RSASHA1  |   RSAMD5   |   RSASHA256     |   DSASHA1         |
    |            |            |   RSASHA1-NSEC3 |   DH              |
    |            |            |    -SHA1        |   DSA-NSEC3-SHA1  |
    |            |            |   RSASHA512     |   GOST-ECC        |
    |            |            |                 |   ECDSAP256SHA256 |
    |            |            |                 |   ECDSAP384SHA384 |
    +------------+------------+-----------------+-------------------+


   This table does not list the Reserved values in the IANA registry
   table or the values for INDIRECT (252), PRIVATE (253) and PRIVATEOID
   (254).  These values may relate to more than one algorithm and are
   therefore up to the implementer's discretion.  Their implementation
   (or lack thereof) therefore cannot be included when judging
   compliance to this document.

2.3.  Specifying New Algorithms and Updating Status of Existing Entries

   [RFC6014] establishes a parallel procedure for adding a registry
   entry for a new algorithm other than a standards track document.
   Algorithms entered into the registry using that procedure are to be
   considered OPTIONAL for implementation purposes.  Specifications that
   follow this path do not need to obsolete or update this document.

   Adding a newly specified algorithm to the registry with a
   implementation status other than OPTIONAL SHALL entail obsolescing
   this document and replacing the table in Section 2.2 (with the new
   algorithm entry).  Altering the status column value of any existing
   algorithm in the registry SHALL entail obsolescing this document and
   replacing the table in Section 2.2 above.

   This document cannot be updated, only made obsolete and replaced by a
   successor document.






Rose                   Expires September 27, 2012               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft              Algorithm-Status                  March 2012


3.  IANA Considerations

   This document lists the implementation status of cryptographic
   algorithms used with DNSSEC.  These algorithms are maintained in an
   IANA registry.  There are no changes to the registry in this
   document.  However this document asks to be listed as a reference for
   the entire registry.

4.  Security Considerations

   This document lists, and in some cases assigns, the implementation
   status of cryptographic algorithms used with DNSSEC.  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

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              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.

   [RFC4509]  Hardaker, W., "Use of SHA-256 in DNSSEC Delegation Signer
              (DS) Resource Records (RRs)", RFC 4509, May 2006.



Rose                   Expires September 27, 2012               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft              Algorithm-Status                  March 2012


   [RFC5155]  Laurie, B., Sisson, G., Arends, R., and D. Blacka, "DNS
              Security (DNSSEC) Hashed Authenticated Denial 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.

   [RFC6014]  Hoffman, P., "Cryptographic Algorithm Identifier
              Allocation for DNSSEC", RFC 6014, November 2010.

5.2.  Informative References

   [ROOTDPS]  Ljunggren, F., Okubo, T., Lamb, R., and J. Schlyter,
              "DNSSEC Practice Statement for the Root Zone KSK
              Operator", DNS ROOTDPS, May 2010, <http://
              www.root-dnssec.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/
              icann-dps-00.txt>.

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 September 27, 2012               [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/