![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Hi Jayshree, We just received the message below from Russ, from the IESG evaluation of 3012bis. The first and last items should be very easy to fix; for the HMAC-MD5 issue a bit of thinking may actually be required. Moving from HMAC-MD5 is also something we need to cover for MIPv4 in general, but let's tackle that more general issue separately, and handle the question of how to do a transition from HMAC-MD5 within the scope of the current document for now. Do you think you could draft some text? Regards, Henrik -------- Original Message -------- Subject: DISCUSS and COMMENT: draft-ietf-mip4-rfc3012bis Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:24:20 -0500 From: Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com> To: iesg at ietf.org CC: mccap at lucent.com, henrik at levkowetz.com Discuss: The title page header needs to indicate that this document updates RFC 3344, and it obsoletes RFC 3012. There are not any known problems with HMAC-MD5; however, problems could be found in the future. How can HMAC use a stronger one-way hash function in the future? Please update the Security Considerations to state how to make such a transition. Comment: Please reference RFC 4086 instead of RFC 1750.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/