[jose] POLL: Remove no key wrap for key agreement algorithms
"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Fri, 17 August 2012 07:09 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E9F121F8598 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:09:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.151, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l-RzkmUMr-Sd for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9470221F857E for <jose@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Tobias (122-49-181-93.ip.adam.com.au [122.49.181.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: schaad@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E48C938F07 for <jose@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:09:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: jose@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:37:31 +0930
Message-ID: <008b01cd7c46$fda69480$f8f3bd80$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac16ReK1E33qYPkKRxqdpZpHt1rNEQ==
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: [jose] POLL: Remove no key wrap for key agreement algorithms
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Javascript Object Signing and Encryption <jose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jose>
List-Post: <mailto:jose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 07:09:14 -0000
<CHAIR> If you voted at the face-2-face please do not vote again. If you want to provide comments please change the title from POLL to DISCUSS. Should we remove the ability to go directly from a Key Agreement algorithm to the CMK without having a key wrap step? This would remove the ability to go directly and would require an intervening key wrap step. Room vote: 1 yes, 6 no, 0 discuss
- [jose] POLL: Remove no key wrap for key agreement… Jim Schaad
- Re: [jose] POLL: Remove no key wrap for key agree… Axel.Nennker
- Re: [jose] POLL: Remove no key wrap for key agree… Torsten Lodderstedt
- Re: [jose] POLL: Remove no key wrap for key agree… Edmund Jay