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

Re: new draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp?

To: ipsec@tis.com
Subject: Re: new draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp?
From: "Michael C. Richardson" <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 09:10:36 -0500
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 24 Feb 1998 09:42:41 +0200." <199802240742.JAA01083@pilari.ssh.fi>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

>>>>> "Tero" == Tero Kivinen <kivinen@ssh.fi> writes:
    >> >Does this have to be 96bits? Since a payload length is included can't
    >> this >just be an opaque blob whose length is determined by the payload
    >> length >field?

    Tero> I think it might be simplier to just allow it to be any length, and
    Tero> not to restrict to 96 bits. There is no reason to truncate it and
    Tero> if someone wants to use hash truncated to 96 bits he can do it.

  I have no objections, it was simply my first thought.

   :!mcr!:            |  Sandelman Software Works Corporation, Ottawa, ON  
   Michael Richardson |Network and security consulting and contract programming
 Personal: <A HREF="http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/People/Michael_Richardson/Bio.html">mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca</A>. PGP key available.
 Corporate: <A HREF="http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/SSW/">sales@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca</A>.

References:

RE: new draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp?

From: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@ssh.fi>

Prev by Date: RE: Certificate Requesting
Next by Date: No Subject
Prev by thread: RE: new draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp?
Next by thread: Regrouping for IPSEC WORKING GROUP LAST CALL
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread