Re: Eyeballs needed.

[Jacob Nevins <jacobn+secsh%chiark.greenend.org.uk@localhost>]

Quoting attached message, Ben Harris wrote (14 June):
| The following entries in the Public Key Algorithm Names table shouldn't
| have been mentioned in draft-ietf-secsh-assignednumbers-12, since they're
| not mentioned in draft-ietf-secsh-transport-24:
| 
| pgp-sign-rsa                     [SSH-TRANS, Section 6.6]
| pgp-sign-dss                     [SSH-TRANS, Section 6.6]

This statement doesn't appear to be true. The copy of transport-24 I
have mentions "pgp-sign-rsa" and "pgp-sign-dss" (as does every version
since at least -09).

I missed this before, as I had a recollection that the PGP signature
formats had been dropped due to being underspecified. However, there is
nothing in the mailing list to indicate that that decision was made
(although it was discussed in February).

So, for the avoidance of doubt, I now think they should remain in the
IANA registry.