On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Yoav Nir <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 24, 2015, at 5:31 PM, Watson Ladd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Ilari Liusvaara
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 07:22:23AM -0700, Watson Ladd wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:33 AM, David Mazieres
>>>>
>>>> This is a misreading: I'm proposing that at any time there is only one
>>>> suite that everyone uses, and versioning is just for transitions.
>>>
>>> This becomes highly problematic when one needs to:
>>> - Support multiple security levels.
>>> - There isn't one technically (meaning, ignore legal constraints)
>>>  superrior algorithm.
>>
>> In case of point 2, why is there a need to use multiple algorithms?
>
> Because I believe algorithm A is superior, you believe algorithm B is 
> superior, but neither of us thinks the other algorithm is so bad that we 
> might as well use cleartext.
>
> So both of our implementations (or configurations) support both algorithms, 
> but whichever one gets to choose chooses according to our preference.
>
> AES-GCM vs ChaCha20/Poly1305. Which is superior?

Would you cry if you had to pick one? Clearly not. So why worry about
making it possible to do this?

>
> Yoav
>



-- 
"Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains".
--Rousseau.

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

Reply via email to