IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Should CCM_8 CSs be Recommended?

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Wed, 04 October 2017 19:37 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593E2132026 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 12:37:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 e99bVPkk4e6M for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 12:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34FF61270AB for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 12:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v94JaWVt005867; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 20:37:30 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=hgYNWxjAAIqZ3Yr/ekCp3/VLoV+s6lWxtt2tMPGn3c0=; b=ap5WZD6KYLu6G22tzIQn14lDP7AYanpEzSTg36W6iPVO83+Nvp8lvzzg8HrQRfdfcU5K Be5JXOWNeiRXfYJH57urrO3mvkFjj7rJ63pkxcriC8+9gAQaqP2BP8SLu02wNaRIdroD D94yJotiJjNAY7eRjWFwq79lv507P9fS0pILskrEzxNGeu9YqUp58NYCh3wDg4XzHfuJ lWNBtzFlPLnUrVr0Zzu2170md80AlSjANexQzk+2EfYtd/W13x8DYZcF8eR2P1OKgXjc 4xSpYAo1txExURzm34maspJn5MKpvPwIZ1R94P5ZL/H5zXzwR1/NK4yMT62AJdaRSQih Zw==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [184.51.33.18]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2dc77hhkf5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 04 Oct 2017 20:37:30 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v94JZpop002718; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:37:29 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.25.31]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2dcksnam83-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 04 Oct 2017 15:37:29 -0400
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.27.101) by ustx2ex-dag1mb2.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.27.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 14:37:07 -0500
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.6.131]) by ustx2ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.6.131]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 14:37:07 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net>
CC: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Should CCM_8 CSs be Recommended?
Thread-Index: AQHTPJqL5DOxVoyYS0CQv5KHiX0PRaLT6sSAgABwuICAAA9yAA==
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2017 19:37:07 +0000
Message-ID: <1B6398D7-695F-492D-889F-2E006C596F33@akamai.com>
References: <CA26DC83-9524-4CDA-910A-7FDCBF73F849@sn3rd.com> <A77ED838-9A38-41AB-B063-FC6BE6996373@akamai.com> <CAOgPGoAH_-i8dpX0Df=bcrS9t_LMi0N+6T-tpr+ybkA3sfn8tg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOgPGoAH_-i8dpX0Df=bcrS9t_LMi0N+6T-tpr+ybkA3sfn8tg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.26.0.170902
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.34.111]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_1B6398D7695F492D889F2E006C596F33akamaicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-10-04_09:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1707230000 definitions=main-1710040272
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-10-04_09:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1707230000 definitions=main-1710040272
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/E07uZoqfMVL_IyV_qgO79G09JDE>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Should CCM_8 CSs be Recommended?
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 04 Oct 2017 19:37:33 -0000

  *   If an item is marked as not recommended it does not necessarily mean that it is flawed, rather, it indicates that either the item has not been through the IETF consensus process or the item has limited applicability to specific cases.
Perhaps change the list “to” to “intended for” ?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email