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

RE: 3DES

I don't believe that this working group should be mandating such an
algorithm as a MUST due to the current nature of export laws.  Please,
we live in the real world and 3DES is and will not be appropriate to
export from the US and Canada anytime soon.  Simply stating that the
IETF doesn't care about export control will create interoperability
issues, and believe me, we have enough of those already! 

Make it a STRONG SHOULD instead.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Adams [mailto:adams@cisco.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 1998 11:52 AM
> To: 'Derrell D. Piper'; perry@piermont.com
> Cc: Steve Bellovin; ipsec@tis.com
> Subject: RE: 3DES 
> 
> 
> However, some of us are saddled with 2 products, for 
> political reasons.. %) 
> One with 3DES and one without.   If we add 3DES as a MUST, we're just 
> going to end up with a load of products with interoperable 
> IPSEC code in them
> that aren't IPSEC compliant..    
> 
> Go ahead, flame away.. %).. I need some entertainment for 
> this afternoon.
> 
> -Rob
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Derrell D. Piper [SMTP:ddp@network-alchemy.com]
> Sent:	Sunday, May 10, 1998 3:11 PM
> To:	perry@piermont.com
> Cc:	Steve Bellovin; ipsec@tis.com
> Subject:	Re: 3DES 
> 
> I can't imagine anyone who's bothering to produce an IPSEC 
> product _not_
> taking the time to do 3DES.  And for those who don't, the market will
> decide...
> 
> Derrell
> 
> 
>
Follow-Ups: