Re: Re: Packet number encryption

[<[e-mail]>]

On -10/01/-28163 20:59, Jana Iyengar wrote:
>
> There's a win here in terms of implementation complexity and several
> implementers have said so. There's a win in terms of ossification and our
> experience says so. There's a potential loss of manageability, in being able to
> detect reordering. This is the trade-off, and I am still in favor of encrypting
> packet numbers.


Given this, what's your position re the 4-bit subsequence number in clear 
proposed earlier ? Is it okay, or has it got too much potential for a signature ?

-Alex

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.