Hi, >> 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.
Fair enough, but what about PolarSSL or GnuTLS? Not saying the devs didn't do their job; just that we might rush something here. Anyway, Leif has also indicated it is out of scope... Ralph -- Ralph Holz I8 - Network Architectures and Services Technische Universität München http://www.net.in.tum.de/de/mitarbeiter/holz/ Phone +49.89.289.18010 PGP: A805 D19C E23E 6BBB E0C4 86DC 520E 0C83 69B0 03EF _______________________________________________ Uta mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
