[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unnecessarily bloated IV calculation
Ben,
> I have this draft mostly completed, and can have it under the group's
> collective scrutiny by tomorrow (Wednesday) evening. My assertion in
> Washington was that the IO-RES draft is incomplete without it, and I
> stand by that. (For those who might have missed this -- we use
> 3DES-CBC-MAC as a REQUIRED prf in IO-RES, and have as a reference only
> Schneier's book, which is too vague to be building a protocol from.)
Wow! I did miss that. Please point out where it says that 3DES-CBC-MAC
is REQUIRED or MUST or anything like that.
> I don't know however, if the political machine has allowed the time for a
> new draft to be introduced.
The political machine! That's a good one.
> Perhaps we can take a poll on the list as to who thinks this is a
> necessary addition?
That ticking sound you hear is time running out on the clock. How about
if you release it, and I reference it. The WG can then hash out :-)
any issues it has but the reference remains.
Not being tied into The Political Machine can someone who is tell me if this
is ok? Can this RFC-bound draft refer to another draft that has not yet been
sufficiently analyzed by the WG?
Dan.
References: