Huh. You learn somethin' new every day...
On Feb 17, 2006, at 16:06, Tom.Petch wrote:
I agree that there is no clear cut case where security will be
compromised, but
as long as RFC eg RFC1510 (kerberos) tie the concept of nonce to a
monotonic
increasing sequence, I think the risk is there and could easily be
avoided if we
started using the term 'strictly increasing' instead.
Fortunately, it just so happens that we dropped that text in updating
1510=>4120. :-)
Ken
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf