RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipsec-esp-ah-algorithms-00.txt

[Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com>]

I'm inclined to modify the draft to define "MAY+", meaning MAY but
likely to change to SHOULD, and to list AES-CCM as having that status.

Donald
===========================================================
 Donald E. Eastlake III       Donald.Eastlake@Motorola.com
 Motorola Laboratories               1-508-786-7554 (work)
 111 Locke Drive                     1-508-634-2066 (home)
 Marlboro, MA 01752 USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Tero Kivinen [mailto:kivinen@iki.fi] 
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 6:17 PM
To: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipsec-esp-ah-algorithms-00.txt

Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 writes:
> I believe that this draft should also have a table for authenticated
> encryption algorithms for ESPv3 and should list AES-CCM as at least
> MAY.

I see no reason to list one algorithm as MAY in the document. This is
the algorithm requirements document. MAY is not a requirement. All the
algoritms not listed in this document are MAYs. Also I do not see any
point of repeating all the algoritms from the IANA registry here, and
say that they are MAYs. Perhaps we should add text in the document
explicitly saying this? I think that also the HMAC-MD5-96 should be
removed as it is also only MAY.

Also I do not think AES-CCM is ready for the SHOULD status yet, we
need some real world implementations now. 
-- 
kivinen@iki.fi