Re: [TLS] Consensus Call: FNV vs SHA1

Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> Mon, 10 May 2010 17:50 UTC

Return-Path: <simon@josefsson.org>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4933A6A5B for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 May 2010 10:50:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.409
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.409 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.190, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y0dmbdMGfyHg for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 May 2010 10:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from yxa-v.extundo.com (yxa-v.extundo.com [83.241.177.39]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85B033A6A4D for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 May 2010 10:48:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mocca (c80-216-25-148.bredband.comhem.se [80.216.25.148]) (authenticated bits=0) by yxa-v.extundo.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id o4AHmPxw009125 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 May 2010 19:48:28 +0200
From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
To: "Joseph Salowey \(jsalowey\)" <jsalowey@cisco.com>
References: <AC1CFD94F59A264488DC2BEC3E890DE50A43B479@xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com>
OpenPGP: id=B565716F; url=http://josefsson.org/key.txt
X-Hashcash: 1:22:100510:tls@ietf.org::mgbNsEtA5oqDUz3U:3bF1
X-Hashcash: 1:22:100510:jsalowey@cisco.com::WkK6lT1bSQHy8uup:bbEY
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 19:48:25 +0200
In-Reply-To: <AC1CFD94F59A264488DC2BEC3E890DE50A43B479@xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com> (Joseph Salowey's message of "Mon, 10 May 2010 10:39:28 -0700")
Message-ID: <87bpcn642e.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96 at yxa-v
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Consensus Call: FNV vs SHA1
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 17:50:57 -0000

"Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey@cisco.com> writes:

> I don't see much new being added to this discussion at this point.  I'd
> like to close on this.  If you have an opinion please indicate if:
>
> a) You favor SHA-1
> b) You favor FNV-1a

I favor FNV-1a.

/Simon