Subject: Clarifications to RFC 4255 ?

From: Simon Vallet <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 18:10:46 +0200

Hi,

looking at the current implementation in OpenSSH, I noticed the
compatibility layer (compat/getrrsetbyname.c) makes use of SIG (RRTYPE
24) records, which is the type specified in RFC 4255, §2.4.

However, it seems that SIG RRs are obsoleted in RFC 4034, §7 (from RFC
3755, §3) in favour of RRSIG RRs (RRTYPE 46).

I was a bit confused by the fact that RFC 4255 both references SIG
records and RFC 4034. Shouldn't the RFC be clarified on this topic ?

Best regards,
Simon

-- 
Simon Vallet
Ingénieur Systèmes/Réseaux
Genoscope / CNRG
Tél. : +33 (0) 1 60 87 36 06
E-mail : [email-masked]

---

From: Jakob Schlyter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 19:39:27 +0200

> 3755, §3) in favour of RRSIG RRs (RRTYPE 46).

correct, the implementation of getrrsetbyname is broken.

> records and RFC 4034. Shouldn't the RFC be clarified on this topic ?

yes, something like s/SIG RR/RRSIG RR/. perhaps we should put this in  
the errata?

	jakob

---

From: Jacob Nevins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 14:44:01 +0100

Simon Vallet writes:
> records and RFC 4034.

The DNSSEC reference was changed from RFC 2535 to RFCs 4033-4035 at the
RFC Editor stage, between draft-ietf-secsh-dns-05 and the final RFC
publication, but the text was not changed substantially.