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

Re: MODP groups draft concern

To: kivinen@ssh.fi
Subject: Re: MODP groups draft concern
From: tytso@mit.edu
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:16:52 -0500
Address: 1 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA 02139
CC: jesse.walker@intel.com, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
In-reply-to: <14910.12195.410747.957528@taulu.hel.fi.ssh.com> (message fromTero Kivinen on Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:39:15 +0200)
Phone: (617) 253-8091
References: <10C8636AE359D4119118009027AE9987031A9059@FMSMSX34> <14910.12195.410747.957528@taulu.hel.fi.ssh.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

   Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:39:15 +0200
   From: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@ssh.fi>

   I am going to leave it in the draft for now on, but if I don't have
   the verification for it when we are going to RFC, then I will consider
   things more. I might end up having two RFC, one with the proven groups
   and second with those checked only using propabilistic methods. 

I don't think that makes any sense.  The RFC should certainly call out
how the primes for the various groups have been
certified/proven/probablistically proven.  But I don't think it's worth
two separate RFC's!

						- Ted

References:

MODP groups draft concern

From: "Walker, Jesse" <jesse.walker@intel.com>

MODP groups draft concern

From: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@ssh.fi>

Prev by Date: build the non-kernel FreeS/WAN programs and install them in /usr/local/sbin
Next by Date: Re: build the non-kernel FreeS/WAN programs and install them in /usr/local/sbin
Prev by thread: MODP groups draft concern
Next by thread: RE: MODP groups draft concern
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread