Re: [lamps] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-algorithms-14: (with COMMENT)

["Brockhaus, Hendrik" <[e-mail]>]

Zaheduzzaman

Thank you for this comment.
See my proposal I already proposed to Martin. I hope this solved also you issue.

> Von: Spasm <[e-mail]> Im Auftrag von Zaheduzzaman Sarker
> via Datatracker
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Thanks for working on the updates.
> 
> This document is expected to be concise as far as I know.  However, it is odd
> that the introduction section does not have any description other than
> terminology section. This  will be very hard for a reader, specially new to
> this topic, to get the context. I would at least expect some narratives and
> some references for the readers. Please consider this.
> 

My proposal is to move the first paragraph from the Security Considerations to the Introduction.

Old text: 
1.  Introduction

1.1.  Terminology

New text:
1. Introduction

   RFC 4210 Appendix D.2 [RFC4210] contains a set of algorithms,
   mandatory to be supported by conforming implementations.  These
   algorithms were appropriate at the time CMP was released, but as
   cryptographic algorithms weaken over time, some of them should not be
   used anymore.  In general, new attacks are emerging due to research
   cryptoanalysis or increase in computing power.  New algorithms were
   introduced that are more resistant to today's attacks.

   This document lists current cryptographic algorithms usable with CMP to
   offer an easier way maintaining the list of suitable algorithms over time.  

1.1.  Terminology

Best regards, 
Hendrik