Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAKE -> Was Re: Dragonfly has advantages
Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Sat, 04 January 2014 21:28 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 [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4FF71AE087 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Jan 2014 13:28:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
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 1CD7QTxPWB-S for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Jan 2014 13:28:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50C71AE092 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Sat, 4 Jan 2014 13:28:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-0-66-41.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.0.66.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s04L8EKw000780 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 4 Jan 2014 14:08:16 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-0-66-41.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.0.66.41] claimed to be [10.20.30.90]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CEEDD67B.22CC7%feng.hao@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2014 13:28:21 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <45E98E61-EF0B-4CC0-A88D-50C7EDCE2AD8@vpnc.org>
References: <CEEDD67B.22CC7%feng.hao@newcastle.ac.uk>
To: Feng Hao <feng.hao@newcastle.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAKE -> Was Re: Dragonfly has advantages
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: Sat, 04 Jan 2014 21:28:20 -0000
The IPsecME WG tried something like this, and it ended with bloody stumps all around. This isn't to say that it would fail in the CFRG, but many of the same people are in both groups. --Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Paul Hoffman
- [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages -> was Re: Reques… Paul Lambert
- [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAKE ->… Feng Hao
- Re: [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages -> was Re: Re… Feng Hao
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… David McGrew
- Re: [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages -> was Re: Re… Trevor Perrin
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Trevor Perrin
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Feng Hao
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Feng Hao
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… David Jacobson
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Watson Ladd
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Samuel Neves
- Re: [Cfrg] Suggestion for open competition on PAK… Dan Harkins
- Re: [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages Paul Lambert
- Re: [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages Feng Hao
- Re: [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages Paul Lambert
- Re: [Cfrg] Dragonfly has advantages Feng Hao