Re: [tcpm] WGLC: draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure-10.txt

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ted Faber wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 07:53:18AM -0700, Joe Touch wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> FWIW, it seems like RFC1122 should be moved to normative.
>>
>> Regarding some of the recent thread regarding the numbers in section
>> 1.3 (Ted's comments, "finish the math"), I've noted before, as well,
>> that section 1.3 is redundant with RFC4953. Replicating the math isn't
>> needed. Also, the prediction regarding the impact of BW on the attack is
>> a guess in this doc, whereas in RFC4953 the relationship is explained.
> 
> I don't have an y strong attachment to where the arithmatic is done, but
> expressions like (2*2^32) need to be simplified so it's easy for a
> reader to compare the risks.
> 
> If the authors are cool with a pointer to 4953 for derivations, I am,
> too, but the final numbers should appear here as well.

Agreed - a summary statement and the final numbers or conclusions from
4953 need to be contained in this doc.

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkjg9QEACgkQE5f5cImnZruQugCfWEPoi8xbrF0g03o8Qtg5wdhN
Sc8AoI+wE8rgAwf3g8J/XQ9Ij3krAtya
=Y2HF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm