As Warren asked us to check the option of combining both drafts, I'm not sure if a general vote for one draft is the best way forward.
I would appreciate if all interested parties (incl Tom and David) could indicate their preference in the following 3 questions: 1. Should the protocols be described a) as "diff" to the previous protocols like done in draft-hmac-sha-2-usm-snmp, or b) completely and based on a decription of a generic hmac-based authentication protocol, as done in draft-hartman? 2. Should the protocols be based on complete or truncated HMACs? 3. Which (sub)set of protocols (hash function, MAC length) should be selected? Johannes David Reid wrote on 29.08.2014 15:36: >> I would like to see draft-hmac proceed, pretty much as is. > > +1 > > -David Reid > > _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
