[Cfrg] Preference for focus on EC rather than PAKE

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Fri, 10 October 2014 02:23 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C25D1A006F for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:23:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.647
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z5yGQN1R1aYV for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EED21A006D for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (142-254-17-87.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com []) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s9A2NeiJ063863 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:23:42 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: proper.com: Host 142-254-17-87.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [] claimed to be []
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EA6A52DA-9C07-4408-82C1-DE6EDF751042@vpnc.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:23:39 -0700
To: cfrg@irtf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/bu-Km8RLDZuhyQEzH7QJIIzkz5k
Subject: [Cfrg] Preference for focus on EC rather than PAKE
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: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 02:23:44 -0000

Greetings. This RG has historically done a poor job of working on multiple disparate items at the same time. For some of us, the need for the RG to come up with concise, understandable response to the request from the TLS WG (which will also affect many other WGs) is about an order of magnitude higher than the need to evaluate PAKEs. The latter can wait until the higher-importance item is finished.

--Paul Hoffman