IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpinc] Review of draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpeno-01

ianG <iang@iang.org> Wed, 26 August 2015 16:09 UTC

Return-Path: <iang@iang.org>
X-Original-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDAA81ACD90 for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:09:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 nhctfoWwttkP for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from virulha.pair.com (virulha.pair.com [209.68.5.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB6421ACD7D for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tormenta.local (iang.org [209.197.106.187]) by virulha.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E33A86D783; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:09:53 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <55DDE4D1.9060007@iang.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:09:53 +0100
From: ianG <iang@iang.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tcpinc@ietf.org
References: <87wpwmnenv.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0cnq9cZdkn=yp8-GJfXDGMP8r1sib3qrQQEQYhF25kYZPg@mail.gmail.com> <87twrpokpz.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0ck2PfKQ8pkDLiSmuLH+81s2GzsBnKYH7e=5ga5nSJvo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <87io85ofkl.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0cmna07KzCZme7pxRgCcAOJLXzup3KPJ+bRimL=n3mpPXg@mail.gmail.com> <87vbc5l8si.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0c=cLj2F6JyFX848D1TuDt0A=kT7UMm8ZPRRu-X6ow4oTQ@mail.gmail.com> <87d1ycizeo.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0c=SRaUR9okBAXaKBZG0wZ12h7aarxPFf7LYCtcQfG-nJg@mail.gmail.com> <20150824142948.GA23716@LK-Perkele-VII> <CACsn0c=h8sqXqQG5NXp9sc5TPhddPMui7Un1DYW8O4uxgwixHw@mail.gmail.com> <BD77DB05-9252-41DE-9D05-D6F01FFD55A6@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BD77DB05-9252-41DE-9D05-D6F01FFD55A6@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpinc/5fnYxsMaA5y1lbmIF-DkO5wt-4k>
Subject: Re: [tcpinc] Review of draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpeno-01
X-BeenThere: tcpinc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for adding encryption to TCP." <tcpinc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpinc/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpinc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 16:09:55 -0000

On 24/08/2015 18:44 pm, Yoav Nir wrote:
> AES-GCM vs ChaCha20/Poly1305. Which is superior?

To dig us out of this rabbit hole, I suggest the question should not be 
which is better, but what is the method by which we pick?

I posit that the objective & aligned way is to tell the proposer of the 
draft to pick.  E.g., David for tcpcrypt.  Eric for tls-in-tcp.

Done deal.

iang

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email