On 02/22/10 11:59, Evan Hunt wrote:
> Note that RFC 5155 takes the time to put the issue to rest not once but
> twice:
I am on the fence regarding the necessity of mentioning the hash
collision issue in 4641bis. While other potential security concerns are
not directly relevant to the topic, this one is (in spite of the fact
that the possibility of a useful collision is unimaginably small).
My thoughts are sort of leaning in the direction that a very brief
mention of the issue combined with a reference to what Evan quoted in
5155 (which seems to handle the issue well) is probably the right
direction to go.
Doug
--
... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
-- Propellerheads
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
