Re: [TLS] draft-kato-tls-rfc4132bis-03 : get rid of unneeded prose

[Mohamad Badra <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I agree with Alfred, the document should avoid repeating details 
regarding Camellia block cipher. IMO, a pointer to RFC3713 is sufficient.

To help the reader, it may be better to separate SHA1 and SHA2 into two 
Sections. An application statement on using them with different TLS 
version should be useful.

Best regards,
Badra

> Hello,
>
> The 'Introduction' of draft-kato-tls-rfc4132bis-03 still contains
> a lot of details regarding the Camellia cipher primitive proper,
> which IMO are out of scope and not needed for this document
> describing the use of that building block in TLS.
>
> The fundamental reference, RFC 3713, already contains what needs
> to be said, and it is not very useful to have every document
> making use of that cipher repeat the same or similar verbiage.
>
> I strongly suggest that the bulk of the 'marketing prose' in Section 1
> (para 2 ff.) be removed from the draft -- in a similar manner as
> it has been done now for the companion Camellia for IPsec draft.
>
>
> Otherwise, I suggest that the WG consider the portfolio question
> I already had raised in
>    http://www.IETF.ORG/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg03242.html
> (combining Camellia-256 with SHA-384 instead of SHA-256)
> and make a decision on whether that document should be adopted as
> a WG document or recommended as an individual submission for PS.
>
> Thoughts?  Opinions?
>
>
> Kind regards,
>   Alfred H?nes.
>
>