- From: Tom Weinstein <tomw@netscape.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Mar 1997 14:17:14 -0800
- To: "David P. Kemp" <dpkemp@missi.ncsc.mil>
- CC: ietf-tls@w3.org
David P. Kemp wrote: > > The TLS base document should specify mandatory-to-implement algorithms > to promote interoperability. Currently the DES/3DES ciphersuites > fill that role, but Blowfish or another published and freely-available > algorithm might conceivably be suitable as the interoperable > baseline. > > TLS "transform" documents could be written to specify the use of many > other ciphersuites, published or proprietary, including RC2, RC4, > Blowfish, SAFER, Fortezza(R), etc. This makes it easier to add > future ciphersuites to TLS without having to re-do the base document > every time. I agree, although I'd like to see at least RC4 (or alleged-RC4) included in the mandatory list. I think the Kerberos work is a perfect example of how cipher suites can be defined in seperate documents. -- You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw@netscape.com
Received on Friday, 7 March 1997 17:08:01 UTC