An objection to moving forward with the existing drafts

[rogaway@cs.ucdavis.edu (Phil Rogaway)]

Dear Colleagues,

I respectfully disagree that any of the current Internet 
Security Drafts should move forward to Proposed Standards.  
These drafts contain significant problems and misunderstandings.
I have enumerated some of these; please see my note "Problems 
with Proposed IP Cryptography", April 3 posting to ipsec@ans.net. 

The end-of-April revisions remain non-responsive to my criticisms.
I don't think it is right for these drafts to move forward
while such major problems go unanswered.

I doubt Ran is right that there is a "rough consensus" for promoting
these into RFCs.  In any case, I believe that such a consensus would 
necessarily exclude cryptographers.

I suggest that counter-proposals (not revisions) are needed for each
of these documents.  I have redone the draft of the CBC privacy 
transform (the easiest one in the set).  You will get a notice 
announcing availability once I figure out the process for making this 
an Internet Draft.



Sincerely,
Phil Rogaway

---

• Prev by Date: IPsec WG Progress Report
• Next by Date: No Subject
• Prev by thread: IPsec WG Progress Report
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread