Re: Support for ECDSA and SHA-2 (SHA-256) in the SSHFP record

[Ben Laurie <ben%links.org@localhost>]

2011/9/5 Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury%nic.cz@localhost>:
>
> On 5. 9. 2011, at 13:12, Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Ondřej Surý <ondrej.sury%nic.cz@localhost> wrote:
>>>
>>> But the question is - is it worth updating in this particular I-D?  Isn't
>>> this more an errata for RFC4255 type of update?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>
> Yes what? :)
>
> Yes to update it in ECDSA I-D?
>
> or
>
> Yes to do an errata / bis of RFC4255?

The latter.