On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 12:59 +0200, Ralph Holz wrote: > Hi Kohei, > > I think Stephen has rather expressed he would not want UTA to pick a > backup cipher suite for TLS. > > The purpose of the BCP is to give advice which cipher suite to > configure. Your proposal would have us double the number of suites > without a clear recommendation which one to use, which I'd like to > avoid. Add to that the people who'd rather see a different one picked > and we'd have more delay in publishing the RFC. > > The fact that implementations of Camellia exist does not mean they are > error-free. The cipher is in little use, too, so I doubt the > implementations have seen a lot of scrutiny.
I doubt that. Camellia was even preferred to AES in browsers like chrome and firefox for quite long time (that is no longer the case though). https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=430875 http://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/6530/why-is-camellia-suddenly-so-widely-used So there is no technical reason for not having camellia in a BCP. regards, Nikos _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
