Last call on Cipher Drafts...

Greg Carter <> Fri, 20 February 1998 14:24 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by (8.8.2/8.8.2) id JAA17951 for ipsec-outgoing; Fri, 20 Feb 1998 09:24:05 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <>
From: Greg Carter <>
To: "'Theodore Y. Ts'o'" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
Cc: "''" <>
Subject: Last call on Cipher Drafts...
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 09:27:18 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

I thought that was
supposed to clear up the issue around the explosion of ESP Cipher
drafts.  In fact I thought most of the individual drafts were supposed
to be nullified by this draft.  Since this one document was prepared
with the cooperation of most of those draft authors.  All the info (inc
3DES) is in one draft.

>From the document:

This document obsoletes the following documents:
     draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-cast-128cbc-00.txt, R. Pereira, G. Carter
     draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-rc5-cbc-00.txt, R. Pereira, R. Baldwin
     draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-3des-expiv-00.txt, R. Pereira, R. Thayer
     draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-idea-cbc-00.txt, R. Adams
     draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-blowfish-cbc-00.txt, R. Adams

I would like to see this one go to last call with the DES.  
Greg Carter, Entrust Technologies

>From: 	Theodore Y. Ts'o[SMTP:tytso@MIT.EDU]
>Sent: 	Friday, February 20, 1998 12:43 AM
>To: 	Daniel Harkins
>Cc: 	Theodore Y. Ts'o;
>   Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 21:14:05 -0800
>   From: Daniel Harkins <>
>     A 2key 3DES is 112bit while a 3key 3DES is 168 (although I never did
>   like those numbers since 3 DES keys are 192 bits not 168 bits). 
>Err, right.  I should know better than to send e-mail out after midnight
>without first checking my multiplcation first.  Sorry about that....
>(The only lame excuse I can give is that my brain was fried after a full
>day of dealing with ipsec/ca-talk issues at Needham today...)
>   And draft-ietf-ipsec-ciph-3des-00.txt is definately a 3key 3DES. So I
>   think Ramesh is talking about a 2key 3DES. But there is no draft
>   which defines such a transform so the request to add a magic number
>   for it is premature.  
>     As far as the other drafts are concerned, I'd like to see 3DES get
>   added to the pile but given the size of the pile already I wouldn't have
>   a problem with waiting on the rest.
>Noted.  Anybody else who wants to express an opinion on this, now's the
>time to speak up.
>						- Ted