Valery Smyslov writes: > > One additional question came to my mind on whether we update the > > RFC mentioned above or not. We could consider our document as an > > alternate mechanism to generate the IV of the existing RFC. > > No, since you define your own transforms (with own code points) you > don’t need to update those RFCs.
I agree on that, and I think the new text is good, please submit new updated version. -- [email protected] _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
