Re: [TLS] Using Brainpool curves in TLS

Johannes Merkle <johannes.merkle@secunet.com> Wed, 16 October 2013 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <Johannes.Merkle@secunet.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 E3C9C11E82C6 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.36
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.36 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.061, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bjsod7v8f18O for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com (a.mx.secunet.com [195.81.216.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C5411E82C2 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (alg1 [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBDAA1A0076; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:15:10 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Y3HEQR-HQjeM; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:15:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-srv1.secumail.de (unknown [10.53.40.200]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D92F61A0071; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:15:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.16.40.201] ([172.16.40.201]) by mail-srv1.secumail.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:15:10 +0200
Message-ID: <525EAD7D.7030508@secunet.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:15:09 +0200
From: Johannes Merkle <johannes.merkle@secunet.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Manuel_P=E9gouri=E9-Gonnard?= <mpg@elzevir.fr>, Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg>
References: <525C11B5.2050604@secunet.com> <525CEFA4.2030903@funwithsoftware.org> <01b901cec9a0$004e12b0$00ea3810$@offspark.com> <CACsn0ckOnrQTOLdUo9gT8hbTx4cEqX9CP6=BRFYtpV1CpT7HXQ@mail.gmail.com> <525E3E6B.1020604@secunet.com> <CA+cU71=ws7Uh6OuJhMdU521Uvm1zj=agb3HPNZudpX1R6v7mXA@mail.gmail.com> <525EA1C6.5030909@elzevir.fr>
In-Reply-To: <525EA1C6.5030909@elzevir.fr>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2013 15:15:10.0061 (UTC) FILETIME=[811661D0:01CECA82]
Cc: Patrick Pelletier <code@funwithsoftware.org>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Using Brainpool curves in TLS
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:15:26 -0000

>> I'm not sure I agree with them fully, but I also don't have very much
>> context. (My thoughts when reading that is "Why sqrt(2) and sqrt(3)
>> instead of pi and e - what makes those constants more trustworthy?")

sqrt(2) and sqrt(3) are much less fundamental than Pi or e. If you ask mathematicians for the most fundamental
constants, you will get 1, Pi, e, i, and maybe 2.

I am not sure how to use the imaginary unit i in an algorithm though ;-)