[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: starting on asking THE QUESTION
Bob:
> SO PROPOSED QUESTION # 1
>
> 1a) Should a 2nd MUST cipher be added to 2406
> 1b) Shoud a SHOULD cipher be added to 2406
1a - maybe
1b - no
Adding another SHOULD to 2406 will do nothing to increase interoperability;
we've tried the SHOULD route many times, with much grumbling and gnashing
of teeth, as nearly every implementation seems to include its author's
favorite subset of the collected SHOULDs scattered amongst 2401-2412. If a
consensus for a second mandatory cipher emerges, we must make it a MUST.
> PROPOSED QUESTION # 2
>
> Should we make the change to the standard (other than switch from DES to
3DES)
>
> 2a) This Year
> 2b) Next Year
2a - no
2b - maybe
That will give the working group time to decide if there is a consensus for
a second algorithm. It is not evident yet that a consensus exists, or that
mandating two ciphers is an especialy good idea (it is not evident it is
not a good idea, either).
> PROPOSED QUESTION #3
>
> Should the 2nd cipher be:
>
> 3a) An existing non-DES cipher
> 3b) One of the 5 AES finalists
3a - no
3b - maybe
Intellectual property claims prevent the working group from considering the
only existing ciphers I would consider, so I can't support 3a. It is not
self-evident that 3b is the right answer, either, since, if a consensus for
two mandatory algorithms indeed emerges, we may instead want to vote for
3c) Two of the 5 AES finalists
assuming we deprecate 3DES to historical status at the same time. I would
vote for 3b if the working group decides to retain 3DES and mandate two
ciphers.