IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] IKEv2 Diffie-Hellman Elliptic curve mess (RFC4753, RFC5114, RFC4869, and draft-solinas-rfc4753bis-01)

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 22 December 2009 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 719CE3A68A5 for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:54:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.632
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id leOlBGMTWoMk for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:54:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 895473A6833 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:54:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.6] (pool-98-109-111-70.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net [98.109.111.70]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id nBMIqQbC001532 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:52:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240800c756c4a8ed30@[10.20.30.249]>
In-Reply-To: <19243.32427.247190.77844@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi>
References: <19243.32427.247190.77844@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:52:24 -0500
To: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>, ipsec@ietf.org
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [IPsec] IKEv2 Diffie-Hellman Elliptic curve mess (RFC4753, RFC5114, RFC4869, and draft-solinas-rfc4753bis-01)
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:54:54 -0000

First off, thank you for bringing the topic to the WG. As the Designated Expert, you are certainly allowed to make decisions without asking, so it is extra nice that you ask on decisions that might be controversial.

On this particular topic, I would note that RFC 4753 is Informational RFC, not a standards-track document. Thus, I would think that desires of the authors of the RFC should have a heavier influence than the rest of us, although our input might be important inputs to them (and maybe to the Designated Expert). Maybe we should put the issue aside until we hear from them, which could be after the holiday.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email