David McGrew (mcgrew) <[email protected]> wrote: DM> My thinking was that it makes sense for the document to mention DM> the algorithm options that had been defined at the time of DM> writing, so the reader isn't left wondering. There are other
Surely we have lots of vanity crypto which has code points which aren't
in this document.?
DM> Someone mentioned in the WG meeting that algorithms that were
DM> previously SHOULDs, but have been deprecated to MAYs, should be
DM> included in the tables going forward, so that the reader doesn't
DM> wonder where it went. This seems like a good point to me.
DM> AES-CTR is the one algorithm in that category in the draft so
DM> far.
I agree with this.
--
Michael Richardson
-on the road-
pgp6uDXc4K65j.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
