[Bug]: domain go.step.sm/crypto lost resolution

[gustavofagundes]

Steps to Reproduce

We can't resolve de domain go.step.sm it's not possible resolve and because that it is not possible synv the lib.

Your Environment

• OS - ANY
• Version - ANY

Expected Behavior

resolve de domain go.step.sm

Actual Behavior

name resolution fail to domain go.step.sm

Additional Context

Other way to solve this behavior it's change the package the module from go.step.sm/crypto to github.com/smallstep/crypto

Contributing

Vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction.
To contribute a fix for this issue, leave a comment (and link to your pull request, if you've opened one already).

[hslatman]

Hey @gustavofagundes, we're aware and are working on solving this. Are you not using the Go modules proxy?

[gustavofagundes]

@hslatman unfortunataly not.

[hslatman]

The domain does resolve correctly again, so the temporary issue should be resolved (hehe) now.

We've spoken about moving away from go.step.sm for our Go modules, not just this time, but also the previous time a similar problem occurred. It's likely we'll migrate to using github.com/smallstep/crypto sometime soon. I'll keep this issue open for a bit, so that I don't forget to bring it up in our next open source triage meeting.

[jas4711]

We've spoken about moving away from go.step.sm for our Go modules, not just this time, but also the previous time a similar problem occurred. It's likely we'll migrate to using github.com/smallstep/crypto sometime soon. I'll keep this issue open for a bit, so that I don't forget to bring it up in our next open source triage meeting.

Is this renaming still the plan? In Debian we happen to have two variants of this package, and we'd like to migrate to the github.com/smallstep/* namespace to harmonize all step packages, but (of course) only if this is what you as upstream will do.

[hslatman]

It's still the plan. Most are done; this crypto one still needs to be done. It's the one that's used in the most places, so needs a bit of time to complete it all.

[jas4711]

Thank you for confirmation! We hit a small issue in the Debian packaging, for reference discussion is here - https://lists.debian.org/debian-go/2025/04/msg00038.html - but with your clarification, I think we should let our packaging reflect your future naming, hoping this will complete eventually.