Re: [Cfrg] Adoption of draft-ladd-spake2 as a RG document

Rene Struik <> Sun, 14 December 2014 22:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E23181A0276 for <>; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:28:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.139
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.139 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WtZ2iM151AQG for <>; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:28:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3BAD1A026F for <>; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:28:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id y20so9842984ier.0 for <>; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:28:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=unjc16OTUKD4kdkU8cWDbwQ+O6u7CJ6VL4egfTnMuMU=; b=B+DYLtCihWjzJmLrbdkiEf6tLjpONB7piWRnnrBK3dpyqBc3GVUMT1ccq+670Mxln1 POCarq8nrJF0mByroASHIg1z9VWLTqmWhcTrEV5jP6Hlq74aEh8V2qjm0F7p3Egrc94l u9DCgxgz+N0lHF4hwafPamArWXwnerFVnZRYZ8FoaNupWgHQd+XeQUx7C9cMygtFfD8u SKVhA4x7E/VwDLxZAcaXsbLngqtJH5QizBuMZTZovK9VlLO/g2bxgWP+YDPSEuvsTVGE T91HJ7bOWsmM3BObQEI5GwY36PxEeFv/N+tQHB2Z7P+z+dxYt4EM4Q3/l+FV6CW54uBq lmfw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id b8mr14895506igf.1.1418596080059; Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:28:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id qj6sm4126163igc.1.2014. (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:27:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:27:49 -0500
From: Rene Struik <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexey Melnikov <>, "" <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010301020801080906080708"
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Adoption of draft-ladd-spake2 as a RG document
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 22:28:03 -0000

Dear Alexey:

I am unhappy with this draft. Besides, I do not understand at all why 
the CFRG co-Chairs choose to take this step (call for adoption of this 
draft, at this specific moment in time) right now. What triggered this? 
This seems to be a random move, at a random moment in time.

I think it would be good if the CFRG leadership could explain its thinking.

Best regards, Rene


TheCrypto Forum Research Group(CFRG <>) is a 
general forum for discussing and reviewing uses of cryptographic 
mechanisms, both for network security in general and for theIETF 
<>in particular.

TheCFRG <>serves as a bridge between theory and 
practice, bringing new cryptographic techniques to the Internet 
community and promoting an understanding of the use and applicability of 
these mechanisms via Informational RFCs (in the tradition of, e.g.,RFC 
1321 <>(MD5) andRFC 2104 
<>(HMAC). Our goal is to provide 
a forum for discussing and analyzing general cryptographic aspects of 
security protocols, and to offer guidance on the use of emerging 
mechanisms and new uses of existing mechanisms.IETF 
<>working groups developing protocols that include 
cryptographic elements are welcome to bring questions concerning the 
protocols to theCFRG <>for advice.


On 12/14/2014 11:41 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Hi,
> This message starts 3 weeks adoption call for draft-ladd-spake2. 
> Please reply to this message or directly to CFRG chairs, stating one 
> of the following
> 1) that you are happy to adopt the draft as a starting point
> 2) that you are not happy to adopt this draft
> or
> 3) that you think the document needs more work before the RG should 
> consider adopting it
> While detailed document reviews are generally welcome, this not a call 
> to provide detailed comments on the document.
> Alexey,
> On bahalf of CFRG chairs.
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list

email: | Skype: rstruik
cell: +1 (647) 867-5658 | US: +1 (415) 690-7363