IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Call for WG adoption: draft-nir-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 06 March 2015 18:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550391A1BB8 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:53:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 IRcSnYfPoE-j for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:53:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-x22e.google.com (mail-wg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB5041A1A45 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:53:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by wggx12 with SMTP id x12so4288736wgg.13 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:53:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=lGFBxDkRkQmrYgaiG9HUZe438ruzavUrmi2130GJ4pQ=; b=X2dcVu04Ren0wLujEFUDcd7j8bzZdH3amO3A0yVb2a7qZwiMM2k0FhZYpfMqCiifWr CzV39EuEgeNAti59ACkXMFmbsxiuLZPlSxqm3wQacVwhQmhBFLhad2mFxUkb9kk1Ucjx yxCRVOAB1gId3OmMEHeBl3VJFwyfUoqYvb/bK0ZS+u4ZjVeEHvDmXa4fVPVVDj0itTxD BXrSJ/FeHP6pdakXv6djZ6UtHiQaQuVoQrB/GgLktddvzdk4LdJLsFbKZjtYMUaWgwK0 8b7YwbGSrLfXL9yFklqn198VZtAnDIB2UiHXwXJ4v7xWq4Tm6MzbpH1vEBj7KhC9nnhL vFyg==
X-Received: by 10.180.81.7 with SMTP id v7mr35839601wix.27.1425667999167; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:53:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.13] ([46.120.13.132]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dn7sm3400206wid.12.2015.03.06.10.53.18 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:53:18 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <F74554C8-4FA0-485A-9B74-9DB0E70D68DD@vpnc.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 20:53:16 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A1D5C9C9-1DFE-41C2-94D2-5F491D86E5C5@gmail.com>
References: <86AC7585-93BD-456D-B75E-F85D2D2A2D7F@vpnc.org> <F74554C8-4FA0-485A-9B74-9DB0E70D68DD@vpnc.org>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/2j7KPLWXKE1oxAsQJD5ji3H_TdY>
Cc: IPsecME WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Call for WG adoption: draft-nir-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:53:25 -0000

> On Mar 6, 2015, at 6:01 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> 
> On Feb 26, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
>> Greetings again. A few people have expressed interest in having https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nir-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305 as a WG item for IPsecME. If you want this as a WG document, and you are willing to review drafts as they move through, please say so on this thread. If you are opposed to this being a WG document, please say so (and say why). Thanks in advance.
> 
> This got very little interest, which surprised me. Without a few more people who will commit to review the document and offer comments, we can't really call it a WG work item. Is there really so little interest in new algorithms that are being adopted in other protocols?
> 
> If you are an IPsec implementer, it would be very useful to know whether or not you would support adding this algorithm to your implementation, and why.
> 

Obviously I’m in favor of adoption, as I’m the author.

[vendor hat on]
If (when?) this becomes an RFC, Check Point will implement this, in all likelihood this year or early next year.

I of course can’t promise dates or versions when this is delivered as a feature in our product - that is more of a UI decision, and out of my hands.

Yoav

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email