[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: draft of the ISAKMP/Oakley draft
I think you've got the patent situation backwards. It's GF[2^n] that
is unencumbered.
The available performance information indicates GF[2^n] can be exceedingly
fast; I've not seen anything documenting comparable performance gains
for GF[p].
The GF[2^N] arithmetic is not a killer ... who can object to shift and XOR?
Hilarie
> 2) Last week I sent an e-mail to you and the list suggesting to add
> EC groups over GF(p) to the ISAKMP/Oakley draft. Up to now I
> haven't received any comment. Perhaps I should clarify my point:
> I believe that elliptic curves will be very important in the future
> and I support the addition of elliptic curve groups as optional
> D-H groups in the draft. However, I think that one should add
> examples for both 'types' of these curves, i.e., curves over GF(2^N)
> as well as curves over GF(p). GF(p) curves are more favourable in
> the ISAKMP/Oakley context because they are easier to implement
> since the necessary mod p arithmetic must always be supported by
> an ISAKMP/Oakley implementation.
> For curves over GF(2^N) an additional GF(2^N) arithmetic must be
> implemented. Furthermore, there are several patents covering
> different aspects of GF(2^N) arithmetic.
Follow-Ups: