[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Derived versus Explicit IV

To: "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson@greendragon.com>
Subject: Re: Derived versus Explicit IV
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 22:01:22 -0400
Address: 1 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA 02139
Cc: ipsec@tis.com
In-Reply-To: William Allen Simpson's message of Thu, 24 Jul 97 13:11:26 GMT,<6319.wsimpson@greendragon.com>
Phone: (617) 253-8091
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

   Date: Thu, 24 Jul 97 13:11:26 GMT
   From: "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson@greendragon.com>

   The extra 64-bit explicit IV was mandated by the current WG chair.  It
   ruined word alignment for IPv6.  

For the record, there is no problem with IPv6 alignment with the current
version of ESP with the 64-bit explicit IV.  Check the the current I-D's
for yourself and see.

						- Ted

References:

Re: Derived versus Explicit IV

From: "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson@greendragon.com>

Prev by Date: Re: HMAC-MD5 test vectors?
Next by Date: Re: Derived versus Explicit technical rationale
Prev by thread: Re: Derived versus Explicit IV
Next by thread: Re: Derived versus Explicit IV
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread