> On Mar 6, 2015, at 6:01 PM, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 26, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: >> Greetings again. A few people have expressed interest in having >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nir-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305 as a WG item >> for IPsecME. If you want this as a WG document, and you are willing to >> review drafts as they move through, please say so on this thread. If you are >> opposed to this being a WG document, please say so (and say why). Thanks in >> advance. > > This got very little interest, which surprised me. Without a few more people > who will commit to review the document and offer comments, we can't really > call it a WG work item. Is there really so little interest in new algorithms > that are being adopted in other protocols? > > If you are an IPsec implementer, it would be very useful to know whether or > not you would support adding this algorithm to your implementation, and why.
Counting both threads, we’ve seen support from MCR, Tero, Paul W, Valery, and Jim Knowles. Together with me this represents at least 5 independent implementations. I think this should be enough for algorithms that some are suggesting should be the MTI for TLS 1.3 ([1]), and where the algorithms themselves can be considered “vetted”. I know TLS is a different protocol, but there’s no real difference in the way IPsec and TLS use symmetric crypto. Yoav [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg15452.html _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
