[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Alternative symmetric algorithm freely available forIETFS/MIME (re: RC2 licensing).

1997-04-17 19:43:38
At 6:56 PM -0700 4/17/97, Blake Ramsdell wrote:
the following:

1. US companies need to sell products outside the US and Canada

Let's be a bit more specific here. *Some* US companies need to sell
products outside the US and Canada (and Mexico, by the way...). Not all of
them. The ones you are talking about are companies that create mail client
software. They are a teeny minority of US companies.

2. The current discussion about removing RC2 40-bit is about removing
the necessary component from the specification that would allow this

Not necessarily true. Some people would like to remove RC2/40 altogether,
others would prefer to move it to SHOULD or possibly just a list known,
widely-deployed algorithms. I hear no consensus yet, which isn't surprising
given the topic.

In any case, this is the business need, and it appears that the IETF
wants to head the spec in a different direction.

Wrong and wrong.

- It is a business need *for a teeny number of companies*. The vast
majority of US/Canada/Mexico companies have a business need for reliable,
interoperable, secure email. If the IETF can get that with RC2/40, great.
If not, the IETF must listen to the needs of all businesses and still come
up with a spec for reliable, interoperable, secure email.

- "The IETF" doesn't speak with one voice, and thinking that a handful of
comments on one mailing list over two days reflects the voice of the IETF
is just plain silly. The debate is only begun, and not very well I might

--Paul E. Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium