Re: [IPsec] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-ah-reqts

[Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]>]

On Mar 3, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Valery Smyslov <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The draft lists the following trasforms based on AES cipher:
> 
> AES-GCM
> AES-CCM
> AES-CTR
> AES-128-CBC
> AES-GMAC
> AES-XCBC-MAC-96
> 
> All these transforms, except for AES-XCBC-MAC-96,
> allows to be used with different key lengths - 128, 192 and 256 bits.
> It looks strange to me that, unlike the others, AES-128-CBC
> has key length explicitely specified in the draft. Why it differs in
> this respect from the others? What about AES-192-CBC and
> AES-256-CBC - are they also "MUST" or "MAY"? Or even "MUST NOT"? :-)
> 
> I think the draft should either:
> - remove explicit key length from AES-128-CBC and make it just AES-CBC
> - add explicit key length to all other AES-based transforms (except for AES-XCBC-MAC-96)
> - leave things as is, but explain why AES-CBC differs in this respect from the others

The next draft changes AES-128-CBC to AES-CBC, and says:

In the following sections, all AES modes are for 128-bit AES. 192-bit AES
MAY be supported for those modes, but the requirements here are for 128-bit AES.

--Paul Hoffman