Re: DH KEX names an "aberration"?

[Chris Lonvick <clonvick%cisco.com@localhost>]

Hi,

The coin toss was for this subject.  Please read over the prior and
current text and let me know if the proposed text sounds good.
Wordsmithing would be appreciated.

Past - [TRANS]-21:

   Additional methods may be defined as specified in [SSH-NUMBERS].
   Note that, for historical reasons, the name
   "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" is used for a key exchange method using
   Oakley Group 2.  This is considered an aberration and should not be
   repeated.  Any future specifications of Diffie Hellman key exchange
   using Oakley groups defined in [RFC2412] or its successors should be
   named using the group numbers assigned by IANA, and names of the form
   "diffie-hellman-groupN-sha1" should be reserved for this purpose.

Current - [TRANS]-22:

   Additional methods may be defined as specified in [SSH-NUMBERS].
   Note that, for historical reasons, the name
   "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" is used for a key exchange method using
   an Oakley group as defined in [RFC2412].  Subsequently, the Working
   Group attempted to follow the numbering scheme of group numbers from
   [RFC3526] with diffie-hellman-group14-sha1 for the name of the second
   defined name.  This is considered an aberration and should not be
   repeated.  Any future specifications of Diffie-Hellman key exchange
   using Oakley groups defined in [RFC2412] or its successors should be
   performed with care and a bit of research.

Proposed - [TRANS]-next

   Additional methods may be defined as specified in [SSH-NUMBERS].
   Note that for historical reasons the name
   "diffie-hellman-group1-sha1" is used for a key exchange method using
   an Oakley group as defined in [RFC2412].  Subsequently, the Working
   Group attempted to follow the numbering scheme of group numbers from
   [RFC3526] with diffie-hellman-group14-sha1 for the name of the second
   defined name.  This inconsistency should not be repeated.  The naming
   of future specifications of Diffie-Hellman key exchange using Oakley
   groups defined in [RFC2412] or its successors should be performed
   with forethought and care.


Thanks,
Chris