Subject: RE: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-ecc

From: "Ari Medvinsky" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:25:56 -0700

I have a couple of questions/comments on this draft:

1)	The cipher suites defined in section 6 all use SHA1.  Although
from a security standpoint the use of SHA1 (or MD5 for that matter) is
not subject to the vulnerabilities that were recently discovered with
these hash functions - it would still be a good idea to define the new
cipher suites to use SHA 256 or SHA 512 .  For example, this would be
useful for compliance reasons (to eliminate all reliance on MD5/SHA1).

2)	Some additional verbiage/clarification is needed when using
ECDH_ECDSA & ECDHE_ECDSA.  For a client or server certificate chain
(e.g., length of chain is greater than 2) - do all the certificates in
the chain have to be based on ECDSA? Or are mixed crypto certs (signed
with RSA) allowed higher up in the chain? 

Ari Medvinsky
Program Manager
Windows Security 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Eric Rescorla
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 6:56 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-ecc

This is a Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-ecc-09.txt The
target status for this document is Information.

Please send comments to the mailing list as followups to this message.

The Last Call will last for two weeks, ending on April 22.
Note: I will be out of e-mail contact for 2 weeks starting April 20th,
so in practice I won't be able to deal with comments before May 5th.

-Ekr

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls