"Paul Hoffman" <[email protected]> writes:

> There is general agreement that this document is a good starting point
> for a WG item. Yoav and Simon: please prepare this as a -00 draft,
> incorporating any of the relevant suggestions you got during the past
> few weeks.

I have uploaded a WG -00 based on feedback.  The document is now shorter
than Yoav's version.  I believe that this document should closely match
the CFRG document, and that contains relevant discussions, algorithm
descriptions and test vectors already.  If there is any area where this
WG want to deviate from the CFRG document (text that I now may have
removed), I believe we need to articulate that and consider whether that
is something to bring back to the CFRG for more general considerations.
I am hoping that there will be no such area (since that may slow down
the CFRG progress), and I expect and appreciate everyone's review to get
consensus around that.

/Simon

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to