Re: [Cfrg] Submission of curve25519 to NIST from CFRG -> was RE: On "non-NIST"

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 11 March 2015 10:06 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 43EB91ACCF9 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 03:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
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 MZKaK9XPIR_D for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 03:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
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 2BB9F1ACCF6 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 03:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D767BED2; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:06:06 +0000 (GMT)
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 5JkoETVEEBGt; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:06:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [134.226.36.180] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.180]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE702BEB1; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:06:05 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <5500138E.402@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:06:06 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>, Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com>
References: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73AAF91123@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <BE305B0B-80D2-48C6-ACE6-6F6544A04D69@vpnc.org> <7BAC95F5A7E67643AAFB2C31BEE662D020E29C4319@SC-VEXCH2.marvell.com> <DC046CE1-5D9A-43BE-BE00-E23D9C5D30FA@netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <DC046CE1-5D9A-43BE-BE00-E23D9C5D30FA@netapp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/YZKdeDeYhl7vaqWhQ0nDC5A7INQ>
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>, "sec-ads@tools.ietf.org" <sec-ads@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Submission of curve25519 to NIST from CFRG -> was RE: 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, 11 Mar 2015 10:06:11 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Hiya,

On 11/03/15 08:09, Eggert, Lars wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> dropping NIST from the CC for now.
> 
> On 2015-3-10, at 22:37, Paul Lambert <paul@marvell.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Given that this illustrious Internet Research Task Group (IRTG) 
>> subcommittee, the Crypto Forum Research Group (CFRG), has a 
>> consensus to recommend the use of 'curve25519' for TLS, and
>> given that NIST is soliciting input on elliptic curves it would
>> be an opportune time for the Chairs of the CFRG to formally send
>> the CFRG's draft recommendation 
>> (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-cfrg-curves-01) to NIST
>> for the upcoming NIST Workshop on 'Elliptic Curve Standards' ( 
>> http://www.nist.gov/itl/csd/ct/ecc-workshop.cfm ).
>> 
>> "NIST encourages presentations and reports on preliminary work
>> that participants plan to publish elsewhere."
> 
> The IRTF isn't really set up to send (or receive) formal liaisons
> to other standards bodies - but the IETF certainly is. So if the
> CFRG made their recommendation to the TLS WG, the TLS WG, Security
> Area Directors. or the IESG as a whole could send such a liaison.

We can liaise sure. I chatted with Kenny about this before and I
think the plan was for the CFRG chairs (or one of 'em) to submit
a short position paper on what's being done in CFRG. I think that
would be better than a liaison.

But if that's not going to happen we can certainly liaise. So
CFRG chairs - will you get around to that this week or have you
done it already?

Cheers,
S.



> 
> Lars
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Cfrg mailing list 
> Cfrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVABOKAAoJEC88hzaAX42ievwH/0mhNjJCsCglov5FSu3f+3jx
mHJ88aHtyTZT2fFwGuY9iFCQztrt1MTtbCli2mJxErz3B1rICOBip63IirrQ1k8s
XkKKRHefIHY+aIk3A6jhtQ8I64gX+MaHmX5IdFVO6MK6TVMrQv5D0rL6toe0Rnoy
rVV/X6B7M+bwHR9Yf4/C8HeFIGYtJAc/XctI0qg0Py658JEzwxaE40y87B0dmd25
nxPDDBoAf3vN488rrk3jah+tFzi+drTSdI6QYvq9TuAdNJDeBwvBBGl34jxf4faV
ZMC2iXyiDyIS2zq9knODtkv/Mcn5Ujr9J5O/8Jlh4SeZZN2cXe98G1zt+J+nI+E=
=2PEU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----