Re: [saag] another conflict review of some GOST stuff

[Dmitry Belyavsky <[e-mail]>]

Dear Tero,

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Tero Kivinen <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Stephen Farrell writes:
> > On Dec17, the IESG will also be doing the conflict review for a
> > draft [1] that documents some more about using GOST algorithms.
> >
> > Since we've typically handled national algorithms in this manner
> > (basic alg details are documented as independent submission
> > stream RFCs) I think this one does not represent a conflict with
> > ongoing IETF work or process. But if I'm wrong, please do let me
> > know.
>
> I wonder why this draft do specify PRFs for TLS, IKEv1 and IKEv2? It
> does not allocate any IANA numbers for them, so there is no way of
> using them, so why include those sections in this draft at all. I
> think it would be better to have those in the draft that allocates the
> numbers which allows these to be used?
>
> Also specifying anything for the obsoleted IKEv1 protocol is bad
> idea...
>

The draft [1] describes the current usage of the Russian GOST message
digest and signature algorithms.
As the algorithms themselves were described in RFCs [2], [3], we now need
to specify some details describing how to use them.

The draft does not specify any locally invented non-standard constructions
but uses the standard ones for HMAC, PRFs and KDFs.

Also, there seems to be no IANA registry at least for PRFs for TLS [4]

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smyshlyaev-gost-usage-17
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6986
[3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7091
[4] http://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters/tls-parameters.xhtml

Thank you!

-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky