Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on MTI Algorithms

I support this.

I think it’s kind of funny to make ChaCha20-Poly1305 a SHOULD-level requirement, when (a) there is no ciphersuite that uses this algorithm in the registry, and (b) the WG has not accepted any document that proposes such a ciphersuite. But it’s just funny, not bad. I’m sure we will adopt the document soon.

Yoav

> On Apr 1, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net> wrote:
> 
> We did not get a chance to talk about MTI algorithms in Dallas, but the chairs would like to judge consensus for the algorithms discussed in the interim.  The CFRG has closed or will close soon on ChaCha20 and curve 25519 recommendations so they are included.  We will be calling for acceptance to bring drafts on these into the working group shortly.
> 
> Keep in mind that mandatory to implement (MTI) is not mandatory to use and that it is expected that there will be profiles for specific environments.
> 
> Below is the proposed algorithm list that had consensus at the Seattle Interim. Please reply on the TLS mailing list indicating whether or not you agree with the consensus.  If not, please indicate why.  This consensus call will close on April, 23, 2015.  
> 
> o Symmetric:
>         MUST AES-GCM 128
>         SHOULD ChaCha20-Poly1305
> 
> o Hash:
>         MUST SHA-256
> 
> o Key Agreement: ECDH
>         MUST P-256
>         SHOULD 25519
> 
> o Signature:
>         MUST ECDSA P-256
>         MUST RSA
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> J&S
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls