[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OFB for IPSEC
I asked Jeff what he meant; this was his reply.
------- Forwarded Message
Replied: Sun, 28 Aug 94 23:58:24 EDT
Replied: "Jeffrey I. Schiller" <jis@mit.edu>
Forwarded: Sun, 28 Aug 94 23:50:15 EDT
Forwarded: uri@watson.ibm.com
Return-Path: mit.edu!jis
Received: by research.att.com; Sun Aug 28 23:41 EDT 1994
Received: by big-screw
id AA25892; Sun, 28 Aug 94 23:41:05 -0400
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 94 23:41:05 -0400
Message-Id: <9408290341.AA25892@big-screw>
From: Jeffrey I. Schiller <jis@mit.edu>
Sender: jis@MIT.EDU
To: smb@research.att.com
In-Reply-To: <9408290200.AA17959@MIT.EDU> (smb@research.att.com)
Subject: Re: OFB for IPSEC
From: smb@research.att.com
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 94 21:59:47 EDT
Jeff, Ran Atkinson quoted you as suggesting that OFB be used instead
of CBC mode, because of packet loss and reordering. I confess that
your rationale escapes me, among others. Could you possibly elucidate?
My rationale is being able to pre-create the pad. Its got nothing to do
with packet loss and reordering.
-Jeff
------- End of Forwarded Message