[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Default" cipher and authenticator
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 1997 14:42:26 -0400
From: Rodney Thayer <rodney@sabletech.com>
So it does. I was thinking about what's in the architecture document for
guidelines in the 'must implement' department.
Do we really have both documents dictating things? Should we?
Rodney,
The ESP and AH documents reference what certain algorithms as
the "current default algorithms". This was done mainly to make certain
issues (such as padding and alignment issues) more concrete and easier
to understand.
Steve and Karen has raised the question of whether or not these
editorial comments caused problems or not. My reaction was that they
made the text easier to understand, and so I supported leaving them in.
It is true that doing so means that we will need to carefully proof the
architecture document and the ESP and AH documents to make sure that
they are coherent. However, I think this is a price that is worth
paying.
If there is a huge outcry against having that kind of
non-normative text in the AH and ESP documents, we can have them taken
out, of course. I view it as mainly a stylistic (and not technical)
issue.
Comments?
- Ted
Follow-Ups:
References: