Folks, The results of this poll were: 12 YES - We need to require the ability for doing a key agreement followed by a key wrap to get the CMK 1 NO - We do not need to require the ability for doing a key agreement followed by a key wrap to get the CMK 1 DISCUSS - More discussion is needed
Based upon these results, I am making a consensus call that we do need to require the ability for doing a key agreement followed by a key wrap to get the CMK. This issue is now closed. Thanks to all who participated in this poll. Karen O'Donoghue (writing as working group co-chair) -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Schaad Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 12:08 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [jose] POLL: Add key wrap functionality for EC <CHAIR> If you voted at the face-2-face please do not vote again. If you want to provide comments please change the title from POLL to DISCUSS. Do we need to require the ability for doing a key agree followed by a key wrap to get the CMK? Current process uses the output of the key agree as the CMK, saying yes would allow for both methods to operate. Room vote: 12 yes, 1 no, 1 discuss _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
