On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 10:39 AM, David Mazieres <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > - ECDH_anon with P256 and Curve25519
> > - AES_128_GCM; AES_256_GCM; ChaCha/Poly1305
>
> This is a naive question, but could we get some guidance from the powers
> that be on what ciphers are and are not appropriate for an experimental
> TCPINC protocol document?
>
> Technically, Curve25519 and ChaCha/Poly1305 both seem like fine options.
> Tcpcrypt was even using Poly1305 in an earlier version (I can't remember
> if it ever made it into one of our drafts).  We removed it from fear
> that this would cause standardization issues.  It seems Curve25519 is
> still an internet draft with informational status, while RFC7539 is an
> informational RFC.  Is it inappropriate for an experimental TCPINC
> protocol document to depend on informational RFCs?
>
> In order to ensure an apples-to-apples comparison between tcpcrypt and
> TCP-use-TLS, I'd like to suggest that we at least attempt to agree on
> one or two initial cipher suites for both protocols to support.


FWIW, in TLS we expect to advance standards track drafts for both Curve25519
and ChaCha/Poly, so I don't think that's going to cause dependency issues.


-Ekr
_______________________________________________
Tcpinc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Reply via email to