Re: [Crypto-panel] Requests for review: draft-krovetz-ocb-wideblock and draft-krovetz-rc6-rc5-vectors

[Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]>]

Hi Russ,

The base OCB has already been published as an RFC, for better or worse, 
and quite recently. So I don't see what we stand to gain by a further 
IPR discussion, especially since such discussions are rarely conclusive. 
I don't think there's anyone claiming that the IPR situation for 
wideblock OCB is different than the baseline OCB.

Thanks,
	Yaron

On 14/03/2019 8:08, Russ Housley wrote:
> Alexey:
> 
> There has been considerable discussion of IPR-related topics for OCB mode.  I think that the IRSG or the GFRG Chairs need to give the crypto panel guidance on this topic before a review of that document takes place.
> 
> Russ
> 
> 
>> On Mar 13, 2019, at 2:32 PM, Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Crypto Panel members,
>>
>> Independent Stream Editor asked for reviews of the following 2 documents:
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krovetz-ocb-wideblock/
>> .....and...
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krovetz-rc6-rc5-vectors/
>>
>> .....in the Independent Stream.
>>
>> These are both currently in expired state, but available in the archive.
>>
>> If you can do a high level review first, that would be great. ISE is looking for one of the following responses:
>>
>> 1) this is a good idea and should be taken by CFRG
>> 2) this is a good idea and should be published in the Independent Stream
>> 3) this is a good idea, but needs some fixes
>> 4) this is not a good idea and should not be published.
>>
>> (If you don't know the practical difference between 1) and 2), that is Ok.)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Alexey
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Crypto-panel mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/crypto-panel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Crypto-panel mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/crypto-panel
>