Re: Promoting PRF_AES128_CBC and AUTH_AES_XCBC_96 from SHOULD to SHOULD+

[Paul Hoffman / VPNC <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>]

At 1:16 AM +0300 6/10/03, Hugo Krawczyk wrote:
>I see no need for further I-D's. As I said in a recent message all is
>needed is a pointer to the AES-XCBC-MAC draft for the definition of what
>ikev2 calls PRF_AES128_CBC. All other issues regarding the use of prf are
>taken care by the ikev2 draft itself. In particular, the draft completely
>specifies the use of prf's whether with variable length key (such as
>HMAC-SHA) or fixed length key (such as aes128-cbc). The only prf's that
>are defined as MUST NOT USE are those whose output is shorter than the key
>itself (such as 3DES). All other discussions regarding prf use in ikev2
>were resolved and reflected in the ikev2 draft.

Based on the fact that the AES-XCBC-MAC-96 draft is in the RFC 
Editor's queue and therefore cannot be changed, I wrote a very short 
Internet Draft embodying what Hugo said here. It is available at 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoffman-ipsec-aes-prf-00.txt>.

Assuming Hugo agrees that this matches his intent above, would the WG 
chairs please add this as a WG item as soon as possible so that 
Jeff's document and my document can point to it?

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium