Re: [Cfrg] Preserving Implementation Optimizations

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Mon, 01 September 2014 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
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 D1C861A040C for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:19:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.132
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] 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 jassFKD6lsAb for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com [96.6.114.98]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18AF21A0319 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECC5816574E; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 16:19:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com [172.27.22.68]) by prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E22E416574D; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 16:19:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from usma1ex-cashub.kendall.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cashub6.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.27.105.22]) by prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C82F51E043; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 16:19:34 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([169.254.1.218]) by USMA1EX-CASHUB6.kendall.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.105.22]) with mapi; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 12:19:34 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, IRTF CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 12:19:33 -0400
Thread-Topic: [Cfrg] Preserving Implementation Optimizations
Thread-Index: Ac/FiB1DR1xs2E2IThCcKVdYmx7uAAAeEsJA
Message-ID: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C71D1204BB0E@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <01DE592A-008C-4CD7-BD00-07FD25B4B463@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <01DE592A-008C-4CD7-BD00-07FD25B4B463@vigilsec.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/ZOUaTeepr5iHON46d72eJLw7UAU
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Preserving Implementation Optimizations
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: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 16:19:50 -0000

> First, the use of the same curve for digital signature and key agreement is
> highly desirable.  This provides obvious modularity.

Can you explain what you mean by the term "modularity"  Tnx.

	/r$, expert in only admitting what I don't know

--  
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies, Cambridge MA
IM: rsalz@jabber.me Twitter: RichSalz