Re: [Cfrg] On "non-NIST"

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 25 February 2015 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 677431A8902 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:49:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oHrvPzjyqLNV for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:49:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C49F21A88FD for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:49:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B9B9BE7C; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:49:33 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pRAVsPBKcHwW; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:49:32 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.87.48.73] (unknown [86.41.57.139]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C36ABE53; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:49:32 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <54EE436B.2000302@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:49:31 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com>, "paul.hoffman@vpnc.org" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
References: <54EDDBEE.5060904@isode.com> <54EDEE67.1010102@cs.tcd.ie> <D02DF679-9485-467F-A47C-FFF15139278B@vpnc.org> <q0xidr.nkcbrp.2vaesh-qmf@mercury.scss.tcd.ie> <D1135B9A.5C434%paul@marvell.com>
In-Reply-To: <D1135B9A.5C434%paul@marvell.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/3nuZ4Hgd6bKu-jIP92brTOgofw0>
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] On "non-NIST"
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:49:40 -0000


On 25/02/15 19:31, Paul Lambert wrote:
> Branding is very important Š  "non-NIST" is adversarial

Branding may be important but considering this adversarial
is silly and over stated.

S.