Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-secsh-transport-18.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 07:47:36 +0200 (CEST)

On 16 Jun, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> .. though I've heard rumors that some folks have indeed implemented
> this and may be using the code point already, in which case we may
> need to use a different name for the standard version..

We at Appgate have implemented x509v3 support for both user
authentication and host-keys. But since the definition of
x509v3-sign-[rd]sa was lacking we used the vendor extension trick, our
algorithms are called x509v3-sign-[rd][email-masked].

In other words there is no need to change names for our sake.

	/MaF
-- 
Martin Forssen <[email-masked]>              Development Manager
Phone: +46 31 7744361                         AppGate Network Security AB