Re: [TLS] early IANA code point assignment request for draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-psk-aead

I'm mainly just looking to economize on different configurations.

On 9 October 2016 at 16:32, John Mattsson <john.mattsson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
>
> AES_256_CCM_8 was not in the first versions of the draft but added later
> after request from IoT people (probably afraid of quantum computers).
>
>
> While I think it makes very much sense to have short tags in wireless
> radio, I do not know how large need there is for AES-256 in IoT for
> constrained devices, or how large the need would be to truncate the tag in
> these cases.
>
>
> My current understanding is that Grover’s algorithm may never be more
> cost-effective than a cluster of classical computers, and that quantum
> computers therefore likely do not affect the lifetime of AES-128.
>
>
> I do not have any strong opinions regarding keeping AES_256_CCM_8 or not.
> We should not give the impression that AES-256 is needed for practical
> resistance to quantum computers anytime soon, it is however a requirement
> for use by US government. Agree that AES_128_CCM_8 and AES_256_CCM seems
> like the best choices in most cases.
>
>
> Cheers,
> John
>
>
>
> On 12/08/16 08:29, "TLS on behalf of Martin Thomson" <tls-bounces@ietf.org
> on behalf of martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Looking at those emails, I am prompted to wonder if anyone can justify
>>the existence of a ciphersuite with a double-sized key and half-sized
>>authentication tag.  RFC 6655 doesn't really explain how that is a
>>useful thing.
>>
>>On 10 August 2016 at 19:33, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@redhat.com>
>>wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 14:45 -0400, Sean Turner wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> We've received a request for early IANA assignments for the 6 cipher
>>>> suites listed in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-ecdh
>>>> e-psk-aead/.  Please respond before August 23rd if you have concerns
>>>> about early code point assignment for these cipher suites.
>>>
>>> I have previously raised an issue [0] on these ciphersuites. The same
>>> requirement was noted also by Peter Dettman as something special in
>>> [1]. However, there has been no reaction from the authors (now in CC).
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Nikos
>>>
>>> [0].
>>>https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/4PZsc_Dy-aT299BYrlBKvZs0BOQ
>>> [1].
>>>https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/onEkdgH30eZgWs8v5Rp-CUqCHds
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TLS mailing list
>>> TLS@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>TLS mailing list
>>TLS@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>