Subject: Re: [ntpwg] NTP Extension Field without Authentication

From: Danny Mayer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:16:27 -0500

Please don't respond to a digest message without fixing the Subject line
to be the subject being responded to.

I threw out SHA-2 as an example of what you might want to use. It was
not meant as a recommendation. Manav's message indicated that HMAC style
of these algorithms are better. Part of what we change in the protocol
would need to include a list of preferred algorithms, how to indicate
what they are (would require an IANA registry) and how to choose which
one(s) to use and which should not be used.

Danny

On 12/13/2011 12:13 AM, Cui Yang wrote:
>> That's one possibility. Another is SHA-2. That's why we need to revisit
>> the question.
>>
>> Danny
> 
> SHA-2 doesn't change much from SHA-1, if only two choices available, HMAC-SHA-1 is better than SHA-2, IMHO.
> Also don't forget that SHA-3 is coming.
> 
> I agree with Manav that an arbitrary size of MAC is preferable. 
> 
> Yang
> --
>   Yang Cui
>   Huawei Technologies
>   [email-masked]
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg