[RSSAC Caucus] [Ext] Re: FOR REVIEW: RSSAC Statement on IANA's Proposal for Future Root Zone KSK Rollovers

[Andrew McConachie]

On Jan 9, 2020, at 10:22, Andrew McConachie <andrew.mcconachie at icann.org<mailto:andrew.mcconachie at icann.org>> wrote:



On Jan 9, 2020, at 00:46, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at icann.org<mailto:paul.hoffman at icann.org>> wrote:

I worry that, as written, there is ambiguity.  Is RSSAC requesting a single study that
would evaluate both alg roll and length change?  or separate studies?  Would a single study
on length change only satisfy the recommendation (since it says "or")?

The latter was what I intended, but I see where there is ambiguity. Better wording might be "... studying and documenting a comprehensive approach to an algorithm rollover, or to a key length change, …”

I’ve included this suggested text in the document.
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U1qKPRx9URRfiI4jijvLKSCS2W6upZRDppUsbANqIOg/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_document_d_1U1qKPRx9URRfiI4jijvLKSCS2W6upZRDppUsbANqIOg_edit-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=KNEpS67O2txk54bIz-1lXP0tI5Rmtg88Ogwh6PVSGXJyTMuY0E2SHr70jrG3fGLJ&m=dQ6gmRar1KdTywAiZ5V_uJlY6H2L-rolaSJxgqTCVbk&s=oVxBbf-vWt3sLnbjqZLY3OpARR1n8TrEJezin_0Du9E&e=>>

Ryan Stephenson asks a good question in the document about whether we should change the title of section 3.2 to "Algorithm and Key Length Changes”.

I have a somewhat related question. Is it better to talk of ‘key lengths’ or ‘key sizes’?

—Andrew

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-caucus/attachments/20200109/bb9f1ebb/attachment.html>