IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Tue, 21 January 2014 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 612A81A01D4; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 09:35:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 NxK9Cc7flNLg; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 09:35:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:d10:2000:e::3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851DC1A0187; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 09:35:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 75-138-17-190.fibertel.com.ar ([190.17.138.75] helo=[192.168.3.102]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1W5fEK-0000wj-Q5; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:35:17 +0100
Message-ID: <52DEADE8.5060504@si6networks.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 14:27:04 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
References: <20140121155253.23475.70004.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52DE9E63.5050404@si6networks.com> <52DEA496.9000000@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <52DEA496.9000000@viagenie.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ipv6@ietf.org, Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>, draft-ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 17:35:24 -0000

Hi, Simon,

Thanks so much for your comments! -- Please find my reponses in-line...

On 01/21/2014 01:47 PM, Simon Perreault wrote:
> It said "DISCUSS" at the top, so I'll do just that...
> 
> Le 2014-01-21 11:20, Fernando Gont a écrit :
>> On 01/21/2014 12:52 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>> (1) Section 5: Why mention only MD5 and SHA1? Why not
>>> HMAC-SHA256?
>>
>> They are just examples. I guess we could add HMAC-SHA256, too. I have no
>> objections to that.
> 
> On all the platforms I know there would be no practical reason to pick
> MD5. Something better is always available and just as easy to use. I
> don't want new code to use MD5 "because it was given as an example in
> the RFC". Removing MD5 from the examples list would make me happy.

Stephen: Would juust removing MD5 address your DISCUSS?

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status