Michaela,
Please feel free to start the discussion on algorithm selection. The
DT output is just "one" opinion. If there is an argument for or
against the choices of algorithms, the WG I am sure would want to hear it.
I am not entirely sure CCM is the right mode, but I am open to discuss that.
Lakshminath
At 09:50 AM 7/12/2006, M. Vanderveen wrote:
I agree with Lakshminath regarding the point about having actual
ciphersuites in a different RFC, so they can be updated.
Personally I'm somewhat disappointed that AES-EAX was chosen, even
though it's fame is that is simpler than CCM, which is what 802.11i
proposes. Not having participated in the discussions on algorithm
selection, I am wondering if anybody have given thought to what can
be done to help the power and memory-limited mobile, who now has to
have *hardware* to please everybody: the EAP for network access, SAP
4-way handshake for link-layer access, MobileIP for mobility, VPN to
sooothe operator concerns, etc, to name a few possibilities. Not all
of these must be done in hw, of course. What do the implementors
have to say about these?
Michaela
Lakshminath Dondeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> EAP-GPSK offers cryptographic flexibility. At the beginning, the
> EAP server selects a set of cryptographic algorithms and key
> sizes, a so called ciphersuite. The current version of EAP-GPSK
> comprises two ciphersuites, but additional ones can be easily
> added.
Do we mean server proposes a suite of algms and the client selects
one? We probably need to think about the ciphersuite thing a
bit. Perhaps the IKEv2 like approach of the base protocol nailed
down in a document and have a "living" RFC that updates ciphersuites
as necessary.
Do you Yahoo!?
Next-gen email? Have it all with the
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42241/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers>all-new
Yahoo! Mail Beta.
_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
