Do we have enough implementations of EC groups to progress RFC 5903? I
realize that NSA RFCs are not that popular nowadays...
No. Because the mess with RFC5903 and RFC 4753, i.e. reusing the same
IANA values for two different non-interoperable uses of the groups, I
cannot say there is enough interoperable use for that RFC.
I have recommended everybody not to use them, as you never know if
they work, as you do not know if the other end is upgraded to Errata
version of 4753 (i.e. RFC5903).
Thats why I would not recommend RFC5903 to be upgraded at this time.
And there is errata for RFC5903, so it does not go in my category of
"Easy, no need to revise document", which was my original list
selection criteria. Hmm.. actually I see that both errata entries for
the RFC5903 are actually rejected, so perhaps it could still be done
inplace.
IIRC we published RFC 5903 using the old code points because there was
no objection, i.e. no indication that people had deployed pre-errata
4753. Whether this was the right thing to do or not is not very
interesting now.
So, seeing that people are slowly moving to ECC, I would like some input
from the group on whether to progress RFC 5903. We will need to
demonstrate implementation experience to do that.
Thanks,
Yaron
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
