ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-tls-chacha20-poly1305-04 - resend

2016-05-05 07:41:42
Hi Roni.

I think I can explain one of your questions.


On 8 Apr 2016, at 5:36 PM, Roni Even 
<ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:

<snip />

Also note, the registry rules are:

0-191        Standards Action                        Refers to value of 
first byte
192-254      Specification Required          Refers to value of first byte
255          Reserved for Private Use        Refers to value of first byte
[Roni Even] So  I would like to assume that there was a reason to have two 
different policies so why not follow it.

<snip />


From  RFC4346 a.5 "Cipher suite values with first byte decimal 192 (0xC0) 
through
        decimal 254 (0xFE) inclusive are reserved for assignment for
        non-Standards Track methods."

So this is the reason to have the registration as non standard document.   I 
looked at Camellia and it follows your explanation except for updating the 
TLS specification yet it uses the first byte from the range 0-191.  So my 
question will be why did you use the first byte from 192 - range?

The WG specifically requested these values. Google was eager to have this 
algorithms in Chrome, so they chose some values at (almost) random that were 
not being used by anyone else. Others have followed suit and a number of other 
implementations use the same values (NSS, OpenSSL). So these identifiers are 
now “out there”. In retrospect, it would have been better if they had squatted 
on the “Standards Action” range, but by now it doesn’t make much of a 
difference.

HTH

Yoav

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>