IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Dtls-iot] RFC 7539 (ChaCha20 and Poly1305) a SHOULD/MUST implement?

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Wed, 15 July 2015 11:35 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ED9B1A894F for <dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 04:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 ebZc7l28FuUn for <dtls-iot@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 04:35:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F10751A894A for <dtls-iot@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 04:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.131.133] ([195.149.223.246]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MFcg9-1ZA9tG3W7R-00EhdF; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:35:16 +0200
Message-ID: <55A6456E.4020806@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:35:10 +0200
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dtls-iot@ietf.org" <dtls-iot@ietf.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
OpenPGP: id=4D776BC9
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="858DuN7JPiSuLvG46GSh1XULm6SpLhke2"
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:VX0FUjYcAmQPVl3ZzOHP4KZNNn3wNtcZOx1f/owf6DbaplESCh8 ImHnAuivgCFIfa4y5uPxISgXkFb5yW26JvxbPw/qB+xethNUdK2T+stz9IiB7zWQlwbh9i+ pfWH/tUi4rmTorw3YoZqjMmVJPXfvYJwK/L5qKPhRC8MDCpSrakTrnLHE/GITCro+pkj0fv FQIdzCqugRG8klVR1F2bg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:wAFRVI43dys=:4+qnm32xyR66AyObICFXzC dg1Slq3C7rhZtN/CBte9uC9+MeGykObs1yNJuF2y4S63h+Xn7UEONicszMV4ruR2Eb11NxYG+ c3jGF7iwtWJUCxb0FQALB9NT4aiBfQfjShXooIRFAaDGQGzgDhj+yXGAtLfRClC73ROYrzb10 Nu3UlHENHYRPG7N6yfIHKRyHMO1hxlpixYlat3d5n/jZXp/w9p5heZK6fdKMryx6hBDWhFxfC eJK58sbH+m5UYXjVI9tSuQjXzrxpU/xQuuu87ZK9IJgZ/BjQN0QhXt0YW8DWxkfXZozMwSZQy QgTUwZ9JyRhqM7I7DDd8ZnYoySlIQnzFpxwOBqUiMypmNgNsPM4ubwe0OeOrFtvU5zij1IiHY AJD/IrYwhXqerTcyHt5gbY5p3wGEH2ku6be1l7IlIgaB/7Gv59xyXjqzguzyAsOjCnk9l/64Q lHF/K0q+S9b7xLziJt2gwEP71HhKkbg2ObvB6w2nVBv60eA8/4zdYAFUhM3xBjcYM6kQzQHtz dS8/SiZpKKy+0sUyO8ge6ejbvIzUF8ALdy7mQCAXsIF6YbY2Yqc/84TdCNXwBxO42Wh2w3YRM r3289+el4THJ66Ukl3+IfJpn/9EFQWtYA1AmeRa53sj09a8+x+d+F980cbGdoqv1qNX1cIa2H FdYGW4DMY35/HKV25IWNvTlciZ0dLzN2fyAsbLcq7fs0sug==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtls-iot/7Gwn4aobAIasUh-5dvKQkveA1CM>
Subject: [Dtls-iot] RFC 7539 (ChaCha20 and Poly1305) a SHOULD/MUST implement?
X-BeenThere: dtls-iot@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DTLS for IoT discussion list <dtls-iot.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtls-iot>, <mailto:dtls-iot-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtls-iot/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtls-iot@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtls-iot-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtls-iot>, <mailto:dtls-iot-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:35:20 -0000

Stephen wrote:

(11) 21: Why not make RFC7539 a SHOULD or MUST right now?  Doesn't it
seem like doing so now in a profile would be the right kind of timing?
And that might be our best bet for healing the CCM/GCM rift so I'd like
to check if the WG agree with that idea or not before we go to IETF LC.
(That might justify a separate thread.)

This is really a question for the group to think about. Any comments?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email