rfc9558.original   rfc9558.txt 
Network Working Group B. Makarenko Independent Submission B. Makarenko
Internet-Draft The Technical center of Internet, LLC Request for Comments: 9558 The Technical center of Internet, LLC
Intended status: Informational V. Dolmatov, Ed. Category: Informational V. Dolmatov, Ed.
Expires: 28 July 2024 JSC "NPK Kryptonite" ISSN: 2070-1721 JSC "NPK Kryptonite"
25 January 2024 March 2024
Use of GOST 2012 Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource Use of GOST 2012 Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource
Records for DNSSEC Records for DNSSEC
draft-makarenko-gost2012-dnssec-05
Abstract Abstract
This document describes how to produce digital signatures and hash This document describes how to produce digital signatures and hash
functions using the GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012 functions using the GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012
algorithms for DNSKEY, RRSIG, and DS resource records, for use in the algorithms for DNSKEY, RRSIG, and DS resource records, for use in the
Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC). Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC).
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. published for informational purposes.
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference its discretion and makes no statement about its value for
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by
the RFC Editor are not candidates for any level of Internet Standard;
see Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on 28 July 2024. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9558.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2024 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 Revised BSD License text as to this document.
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Terminology
2. DNSKEY Resource Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. DNSKEY Resource Records
2.1. Using a Public Key with Existing Cryptographic 2.1. Using a Public Key with Existing Cryptographic Libraries
Libraries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. GOST DNSKEY RR Example
2.2. GOST DNSKEY RR Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. RRSIG Resource Records
3. RRSIG Resource Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. RRSIG RR Example
3.1. RRSIG RR Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. DS Resource Records
4. DS Resource Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. DS RR Example
4.1. DS RR Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Operational Considerations
5. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.1. Key Sizes
5.1. Key Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.2. Signature Sizes
5.2. Signature Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.3. Digest Sizes
5.3. Digest Sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Implementation Considerations
6. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. IANA Considerations
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. Security Considerations
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. References
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9.1. Normative References
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9.2. Informative References
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Acknowledgments
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Authors' Addresses
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Domain Name System (DNS) is the global hierarchically distributed The Domain Name System (DNS) is the global, hierarchically
database for Internet Naming. The DNS has been extended to use distributed database for Internet Naming. The DNS has been extended
cryptographic keys and digital signatures for the verification of the to use cryptographic keys and digital signatures for the verification
authenticity and integrity of its data. RFC 4033 [RFC4033], RFC 4034 of the authenticity and integrity of its data. RFC 4033 [RFC4033],
[RFC4034], and RFC 4035 [RFC4035] describe these DNS Security RFC 4034 [RFC4034], and RFC 4035 [RFC4035] describe these DNS
Extensions, called DNSSEC. Security Extensions, called DNSSEC.
RFC 4034 describes how to store DNSKEY and RRSIG resource records, RFC 4034 describes how to store DNSKEY and RRSIG resource records and
and specifies a list of cryptographic algorithms to use. This specifies a list of cryptographic algorithms to use. This document
document extends that list with the signature and hash algorithms extends that list with the signature and hash algorithms GOST R
GOST R 34.10-2012 ([RFC7091]) and GOST R 34.11-2012 ([RFC6986]), and 34.10-2012 ([RFC7091]) and GOST R 34.11-2012 ([RFC6986]), and it
specifies how to store DNSKEY data and how to produce RRSIG resource specifies how to store DNSKEY data and how to produce RRSIG resource
records with these algorithms. records with these algorithms.
Algorithms GOsudarstvennyy STandart(GOST) R 34.10-2012 and GOST R GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012 are Russian national
34.11-2012 are Russian national standards. Their cryptographic standards. Their cryptographic properties haven't been independently
properties haven't been independently verified. verified.
Familiarity with DNSSEC and with GOST signature and hash algorithms Familiarity with DNSSEC and with GOST signature and hash algorithms
is assumed in this document. is assumed in this document.
Caution:
This specification is not a standard and does not have IETF community
consensus. It makes use of a cryptographic algorithm that is a
national standard for Russia. Neither the IETF nor the IRTF has
analyzed that algorithm for suitability for any given application,
and it may contain either intended or unintended weaknesses.
1.1. Terminology 1.1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
2. DNSKEY Resource Records 2. DNSKEY Resource Records
The format of the DNSKEY RR can be found in RFC 4034 [RFC4034]. The format of the DNSKEY RR can be found in RFC 4034 [RFC4034].
GOST R 34.10-2012 public keys are stored with the algorithm number GOST R 34.10-2012 public keys are stored with the algorithm number
TBA1. 23.
According to RFC 7091 [RFC7091], a GOST R 34.10-2012 public key is a According to RFC 7091 [RFC7091], a GOST R 34.10-2012 public key is a
point on the elliptic curve Q = (x,y). The wire representation of a point on the elliptic curve Q = (x, y). The wire representation of a
public key MUST contain 64 octets, where the first 32 octets contain public key MUST contain 64 octets, where the first 32 octets contain
the little-endian representation of x and the second 32 octets the little-endian representation of x and the second 32 octets
contain the little-endian representation of y. contain the little-endian representation of y.
As RFC 6986 and RFC 7091 allows 2 variants of length of the output As RFC 6986 and RFC 7091 allow two variants of the length of the
hash and signature and many variants of parameters of the digital output hash and the signature and many variants of parameters of the
signature, for the purpose of this document we use 256-bit variant of digital signature, for the purpose of this document we use the
the digital signature algorithm, corresponding 256-bit variant of the 256-bit variant of the digital signature algorithm, corresponding
digest algorithm. We select the parameters for the digital signature with the 256-bit variant of the digest algorithm. We select the
algorithm to be id-tc26-gost-3410-2012-256-paramSetA as specified in parameters for the digital signature algorithm to be id-tc26-gost-
RFC 7836 [RFC7836]. 3410-2012-256-paramSetA as specified in RFC 7836 [RFC7836]; this
document refers to it as "parameter set A".
2.1. Using a Public Key with Existing Cryptographic Libraries 2.1. Using a Public Key with Existing Cryptographic Libraries
At the time of this writing, existing GOST-aware cryptographic At the time of this writing, existing GOST-aware cryptographic
libraries are capable of reading GOST R 34.10-2012 public keys via a libraries are capable of reading GOST R 34.10-2012 public keys via a
generic X.509 API if the key is encoded according to RFC 9215 generic X.509 API if the key is encoded according to RFC 9215
[RFC9215], Section 4. [RFC9215], Section 4.
To make this encoding from the wire format of a GOST R 34.10-2012 To make this encoding from the wire format of a GOST R 34.10-2012
public key with the parameters used in this document, prepend the 64 public key with the parameters used in this document, prepend the 64
skipping to change at page 4, line 14 skipping to change at line 159
0 92: SEQUENCE { 0 92: SEQUENCE {
2 23: SEQUENCE { 2 23: SEQUENCE {
4 8: OBJECT IDENTIFIER '1 2 643 7 1 1 1 1' 4 8: OBJECT IDENTIFIER '1 2 643 7 1 1 1 1'
14 11: SEQUENCE { 14 11: SEQUENCE {
16 9: OBJECT IDENTIFIER '1 2 643 7 1 2 1 1 1' 16 9: OBJECT IDENTIFIER '1 2 643 7 1 2 1 1 1'
: } : }
: } : }
27 65: BIT STRING 27 65: BIT STRING
The OIDs in the structure above represent GOST R 34.10-2012 public The OIDs in the structure above represent a GOST R 34.10-2012 public
key with 256 bits private key length algorithm and Parameter set A. key with a 256-bit private key length and parameter set A. The
The structure itself represents SubjectPublicKeyInfo field of an structure itself represents SubjectPublicKeyInfo field of an X.509
X.509 certificate as defined in RFC 5280 [RFC5280], Section 4.1. certificate as defined in RFC 5280 [RFC5280], Section 4.1
2.2. GOST DNSKEY RR Example 2.2. GOST DNSKEY RR Example
Given a private key with the following value: Given a private key with the following value:
Private-key-format: v1.2 Private-key-format: v1.2
Algorithm: TBA1 (ECC-GOST12) Algorithm: 23 (ECC-GOST12)
Gost12Asn1: MD4CAQAwFwYIKoUDBwEBAQEwCwYJKoUDBwECAQEBBCD/Mw9o6R5lQHJ13jz0 Gost12Asn1: MD4CAQAwFwYIKoUDBwEBAQEwCwYJKoUDBwECAQEBBCD/Mw9o6R5lQHJ13
W+C1tdsS4W7RJn04rk9MGJq3Hg== jz0W+C1tdsS4W7RJn04rk9MGJq3Hg==
The following DNSKEY RR stores a DNS zone key for example: The following DNSKEY RR stores a DNS zone key for example:
example. 600 IN DNSKEY 256 3 TBA1 ( example. 600 IN DNSKEY 256 3 23 (
XGiiHlKUJd5fSeAK5O3L4tUNCPxs4pGqum6wKbqjdkqu XGiiHlKUJd5fSeAK5O3L4tUNCPxs4pGqum6wKbqjdkqu
IQ8nOXrilXZ9HcY8b2AETkWrtWHfwvJD4twPPJFQSA== IQ8nOXrilXZ9HcY8b2AETkWrtWHfwvJD4twPPJFQSA==
) ;{id = 47355 (zsk), size = 512b} ) ;{id = 47355 (zsk), size = 512b}
The private key here is presented in PrivateKeyInfo ASN.1 structure, The private key here is presented in PrivateKeyInfo ASN.1 structure,
as described in RFC5208 [RFC5208], Section 5. as described in RFC 5958 [RFC5958], Section 2.
Public key can be calculated from the private key using algorithm The public key can be calculated from the private key using algorithm
described in RFC 7091 [RFC7091]. described in RFC 7091 [RFC7091].
[RFC Editor note: Note: Algorithm numbers 23 and 5 are used as an
example in this document, as actual numbers have not yet been
assigned. If the assigned values will differ, the example keys and
signatures will have to be recalculated before the official
publication of the RFC.]
3. RRSIG Resource Records 3. RRSIG Resource Records
The value of the signature field in the RRSIG RR follows RFC 7091 The value of the signature field in the RRSIG RR follows RFC 7091
[RFC7091] and is calculated as follows. The values for the RDATA [RFC7091] and is calculated as follows. The values for the RDATA
fields that precede the signature data are specified in RFC 4034 fields that precede the signature data are specified in RFC 4034
[RFC4034]. [RFC4034].
hash = GOSTR3411-2012(data) hash = GOSTR3411-2012(data)
where "data" is the wire format data of the resource record set that where "data" is the wire format data of the resource record set that
is signed, as specified in RFC 4034 [RFC4034]. is signed, as specified in RFC 4034 [RFC4034].
The signature is calculated from the hash according to the GOST R The signature is calculated from the hash according to GOST R
34.10-2012 standard, and its wire format is compatible with RFC 7091 34.10-2012, and its wire format is compatible with RFC 7091
[RFC7091]. [RFC7091].
3.1. RRSIG RR Example 3.1. RRSIG RR Example
Consider a given RRset consisting of one MX RR to be signed with the Consider a given RRset consisting of one MX RR to be signed with the
private key described in Section 2.2 of this document: private key described in Section 2.2 of this document:
example. 600 IN MX 10 mail.example. example. 600 IN MX 10 mail.example.
Setting the inception date to 2022-10-06 12:32:30 UTC and the Setting the inception date to 2022-10-06 12:32:30 UTC and the
expiration date to 2022-11-03 12:32:30 UTC, the following signature expiration date to 2022-11-03 12:32:30 UTC, the following signature
RR will be valid: RR will be valid:
example. 600 IN RRSIG MX TBA1 1 600 20221103123230 ( example. 600 IN RRSIG MX 23 1 600 20221103123230 (
20221006123230 47355 example. 20221006123230 47355 example.
EuLO0Qpn6zT1pzj9T2H5AWjcgzfmjNiK/vj811bExa0V EuLO0Qpn6zT1pzj9T2H5AWjcgzfmjNiK/vj811bExa0V
HMOVD9ma8rpf0B+D+V4Q0CWu1Ayzu+H/SyndnOWGxw== HMOVD9ma8rpf0B+D+V4Q0CWu1Ayzu+H/SyndnOWGxw==
) )
The GOST R 34.10-2012 signature algorithm uses random (pseudorandom) The GOST R 34.10-2012 signature algorithm uses random (pseudorandom)
integer k as described in Section 6.1 of RFC 7091 [RFC7091]. The integer k as described in Section 6.1 of RFC 7091 [RFC7091]. The
following value for k was used to produce the signature example. following value for k was used to produce the signature example.
k = 8BBD0CE7CAF3FC1C2503DF30D13ED5DB75EEC44060FA22FB7E29628407C1E34 k = 8BBD0CE7CAF3FC1C2503DF30D13ED5DB75EEC44060FA22FB7E29628407C1E34
This value for k MUST NOT be used when computing GOST R 34.10-2012 This value for k MUST NOT be used when computing GOST R 34.10-2012
signatures. It is provided only so the above signature example can signatures. It is provided only so the above signature example can
be reproduced. The actual signature value will differ between be reproduced. The actual signature value will differ between
signature calculations. signature calculations.
4. DS Resource Records 4. DS Resource Records
The GOST R 34.11-2012 digest algorithm is denoted in DS RRs by the The GOST R 34.11-2012 digest algorithm is denoted in DS RRs by the
digest type TBA2. The wire format of a digest value is compatible digest type 5. The wire format of a digest value is compatible with
with RFC 6986 [RFC6986]. RFC 6986 [RFC6986].
4.1. DS RR Example 4.1. DS RR Example
For Key Signing Key (KSK): For Key Signing Key (KSK):
example. IN DNSKEY 257 3 TBA1 ( example. IN DNSKEY 257 3 23 (
p8Req8DLJOfPymO5vExuK4gCcihF5N1YL7veCJ47av+w p8Req8DLJOfPymO5vExuK4gCcihF5N1YL7veCJ47av+w
h/qs9yJpD064k02rYUHfWnr7IjvJlbn3Z0sTZe9GRQ== h/qs9yJpD064k02rYUHfWnr7IjvJlbn3Z0sTZe9GRQ==
) ;{id = 29468 (ksk), size = 512b} ) ;{id = 29468 (ksk), size = 512b}
The DS RR will be: The DS RR will be:
example. IN DS 29468 TBA1 TBA2 ( example. IN DS 29468 23 5 (
6033725b0ccfc05d1e9d844d49c6cf89 6033725b0ccfc05d1e9d844d49c6cf89
0b13d5eac9439189947d5db6c8d1c1ec 0b13d5eac9439189947d5db6c8d1c1ec
) )
5. Operational Considerations 5. Operational Considerations
5.1. Key Sizes 5.1. Key Sizes
The key size of GOST R 34.10-2012 public keys conforming to this The key size of GOST R 34.10-2012 public keys conforming to this
specification MUST be 512 bits according to RFC 7091 [RFC7091]. specification MUST be 512 bits according to RFC 7091 [RFC7091].
skipping to change at page 6, line 37 skipping to change at line 272
specification MUST be 512 bits according to RFC 7091 [RFC7091]. specification MUST be 512 bits according to RFC 7091 [RFC7091].
5.3. Digest Sizes 5.3. Digest Sizes
The size of a GOST R 34.11-2012 digest conforming to this The size of a GOST R 34.11-2012 digest conforming to this
specification MUST be 256 bits according to RFC 6986 [RFC6986]. specification MUST be 256 bits according to RFC 6986 [RFC6986].
6. Implementation Considerations 6. Implementation Considerations
The support of this cryptographic suite in DNSSEC-aware systems is The support of this cryptographic suite in DNSSEC-aware systems is
OPTIONAL. According to RFC6840 [RFC6840], Section 5.2 systems that OPTIONAL. According to RFC 6840 [RFC6840], Section 5.2, systems that
do not support these algorithms MUST ignore the RRSIG, DNSKEY and DS do not support these algorithms MUST ignore the RRSIG, DNSKEY, and DS
resource records associated with the GOST R 34.10-2012 digital resource records associated with the GOST R 34.10-2012 digital
signature algorithm. signature algorithm.
[(To be removed in RFC). To check the correctness of the
implementation, authors recommend using OpenSSL 1.1.1 or 3.0.x
series, a fork of ldns available at
https://github.com/beldmit/ldns/tree/gost2012, and a reference
implementation of GOST crypto algorithms available at
https://github.com/gost-engine/engine.]
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
This document updates the IANA registry "DNS Security Algorithm The following entry has been added to the IANA registry for "DNS
Numbers". The following entries have been added to the registry: Security Algorithm Numbers":
Zone Trans. +========+=============+============+=========+========+===========+
Value Algorithm Mnemonic Signing Sec. References | Number | Description | Mnemonic | Zone | Trans. | Reference |
TBA1 GOST R 34.10-2012 ECC-GOST12 Y * RFC TBA | | | | Signing | Sec. | |
+========+=============+============+=========+========+===========+
| 23 | GOST R | ECC-GOST12 | Y | * | RFC 9558 |
| | 34.10-2012 | | | | |
+--------+-------------+------------+---------+--------+-----------+
This document updates the IANA registry "Digest Algorithms" in the Table 1
"Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type Digest Algorithms"
registry group by adding an entry for the GOST R 34.11-2012
algorithm:
Value Algorithm Status The following entry has been added to the IANA registry for "Digest
TBA2 GOST R 34.11-2012 OPTIONAL Algorithms" in the "Delegation Signer (DS) Resource Record (RR) Type
Digest Algorithms" registry group:
[RFC editor note: For the purpose of example computations, the +=======+===================+==========+===========+
following values were used: TBA1 = 23, TBA2 = 5. If the assigned | Value | Description | Status | Reference |
values will differ, the example keys and signatures will have to be +=======+===================+==========+===========+
recalculated before the official publication of the RFC.] | 5 | GOST R 34.11-2012 | OPTIONAL | RFC 9558 |
+-------+-------------------+----------+-----------+
Table 2
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
It is recommended to use a dual KSK algorithm signed zone until GOST- It is recommended to use a dual KSK algorithm signed zone until GOST-
aware DNSSEC software become more widespread, unless GOST-only aware DNSSEC software becomes more widespread, unless GOST-only
cryptography is required. Otherwise, GOST-signed zones may be cryptography is to be used. Otherwise, GOST-signed zones may be
considered unsigned by the DNSSEC software currently in use. considered unsigned by the DNSSEC software currently in use.
Currently, the cryptographic resistance of the GOST R 34.10-2012 Like all algorithms, it is possible that a signficant flaw could be
digital signature algorithm is estimated as 2**128 operations of discovered with GOST R 34.11-2012. In that case, deployments should
multiple elliptic curve point computations on prime modulus of order roll over to another algorithm. See RFC 7583 [RFC7583] on the timing
2**256. of such changes.
Currently, the cryptographic collision resistance of the GOST R
34.11-2012 hash algorithm is estimated as 2**128 operations of
computations of a step hash function.
9. Acknowledgments
This document is a minor extension to RFC 4034 [RFC4034]. Also, we
tried to follow the documents RFC 3110 [RFC3110], RFC 4509 [RFC4509],
and RFC 5933 [RFC5933] for consistency. The authors of and
contributors to these documents are gratefully acknowledged for their
hard work.
The following people provided additional feedback, text, and valuable
assistance: Alexander Venedyukhin, Michael StJohns, Valery Smyslov,
Tim Wicinski, Stephane Bortzmeyer.
10. References 9. References
10.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3110] Eastlake 3rd, D., "RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the [RFC3110] Eastlake 3rd, D., "RSA/SHA-1 SIGs and RSA KEYs in the
Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 3110, DOI 10.17487/RFC3110, Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 3110, DOI 10.17487/RFC3110,
May 2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3110>. May 2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3110>.
skipping to change at page 8, line 43 skipping to change at line 358
[RFC6986] Dolmatov, V., Ed. and A. Degtyarev, "GOST R 34.11-2012: [RFC6986] Dolmatov, V., Ed. and A. Degtyarev, "GOST R 34.11-2012:
Hash Function", RFC 6986, DOI 10.17487/RFC6986, August Hash Function", RFC 6986, DOI 10.17487/RFC6986, August
2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6986>. 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6986>.
[RFC7091] Dolmatov, V., Ed. and A. Degtyarev, "GOST R 34.10-2012: [RFC7091] Dolmatov, V., Ed. and A. Degtyarev, "GOST R 34.10-2012:
Digital Signature Algorithm", RFC 7091, Digital Signature Algorithm", RFC 7091,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7091, December 2013, DOI 10.17487/RFC7091, December 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7091>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7091>.
[RFC7583] Morris, S., Ihren, J., Dickinson, J., and W. Mekking,
"DNSSEC Key Rollover Timing Considerations", RFC 7583,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7583, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7583>.
[RFC7836] Smyshlyaev, S., Ed., Alekseev, E., Oshkin, I., Popov, V., [RFC7836] Smyshlyaev, S., Ed., Alekseev, E., Oshkin, I., Popov, V.,
Leontiev, S., Podobaev, V., and D. Belyavsky, "Guidelines Leontiev, S., Podobaev, V., and D. Belyavsky, "Guidelines
on the Cryptographic Algorithms to Accompany the Usage of on the Cryptographic Algorithms to Accompany the Usage of
Standards GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012", Standards GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012",
RFC 7836, DOI 10.17487/RFC7836, March 2016, RFC 7836, DOI 10.17487/RFC7836, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7836>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7836>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
10.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[RFC4509] Hardaker, W., "Use of SHA-256 in DNSSEC Delegation Signer [RFC4509] Hardaker, W., "Use of SHA-256 in DNSSEC Delegation Signer
(DS) Resource Records (RRs)", RFC 4509, (DS) Resource Records (RRs)", RFC 4509,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4509, May 2006, DOI 10.17487/RFC4509, May 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4509>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4509>.
[RFC5208] Kaliski, B., "Public-Key Cryptography Standards (PKCS) #8:
Private-Key Information Syntax Specification Version 1.2",
RFC 5208, DOI 10.17487/RFC5208, May 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5208>.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., [RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008, (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.
[RFC5933] Dolmatov, V., Ed., Chuprina, A., and I. Ustinov, "Use of [RFC5933] Dolmatov, V., Ed., Chuprina, A., and I. Ustinov, "Use of
GOST Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource GOST Signature Algorithms in DNSKEY and RRSIG Resource
Records for DNSSEC", RFC 5933, DOI 10.17487/RFC5933, July Records for DNSSEC", RFC 5933, DOI 10.17487/RFC5933, July
2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5933>. 2010, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5933>.
[RFC5958] Turner, S., "Asymmetric Key Packages", RFC 5958,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5958, August 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5958>.
[RFC9215] Baryshkov, D., Ed., Nikolaev, V., and A. Chelpanov, "Using [RFC9215] Baryshkov, D., Ed., Nikolaev, V., and A. Chelpanov, "Using
GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012 Algorithms with GOST R 34.10-2012 and GOST R 34.11-2012 Algorithms with
the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure", RFC 9215, the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure", RFC 9215,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9215, March 2022, DOI 10.17487/RFC9215, March 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9215>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9215>.
Acknowledgments
This document is a minor extension to RFC 4034 [RFC4034]. Also, we
tried to follow the documents RFC 3110 [RFC3110], RFC 4509 [RFC4509],
and RFC 5933 [RFC5933] for consistency. The authors of and
contributors to these documents are gratefully acknowledged for their
hard work.
The following people provided additional feedback, text, and valuable
assistance: Alexander Venedyukhin, Michael StJohns, Valery Smyslov,
Tim Wicinski, and Stéphane Bortzmeyer.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Boris Makarenko Boris Makarenko
The Technical center of Internet, LLC The Technical center of Internet, LLC
8 marta str., 1, bld 12 8 marta St., 1, Bldg. 12
Moscow Moscow
127083 127083
Russian Federation Russian Federation
Email: bmakarenko@tcinet.ru Email: bmakarenko@tcinet.ru
Vasily Dolmatov (editor) Vasily Dolmatov (editor)
JSC "NPK Kryptonite" JSC "NPK Kryptonite"
Spartakovskaya sq., 14, bld 2, JSC "NPK Kryptonite" Spartakovskaya Sq., 14, Bldg. 2
Moscow Moscow
105082 105082
Russian Federation Russian Federation
Email: vdolmatov@gmail.com Email: vdolmatov@gmail.com
 End of changes. 44 change blocks. 
151 lines changed or deleted 147 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48.