Subject: PPP Triple-DES Encryption Protocol (3DESE) to Proposed Standard

From: Karl Fox <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 08:54:14 -0800

The IESG has asked me why DESE and 3DESE are Informational instead of
standards track documents.  If I remember correctly, it's because we
modeled the ECP documents on the similar CCP documents.  The CCP
algorithms were almost all proprietary and thus couldn't be standards
track, but that argument doesn't apply to DES, which is freely
available.

Does anybody object to moving DESE and 3DESE to standards track?
Please respond quickly if you want your opinion to count.

> Jeff and Thomas,
> 
> The PPPEXT Working Group recommends that The PPP Triple-DES Encryption
> Protocol (3DESE), draft-ietf-pppext-3des-encrypt-00.txt, be advanced
> to Informational Standard.
> -- 
> Karl Fox, servant of God, employee of Ascend Communications
> 655 Metro Place South, Suite 370, Dublin, Ohio  43017   +1 614 760 4041
-- 
Karl Fox, servant of God, employee of Ascend Communications
655 Metro Place South, Suite 370, Dublin, Ohio  43017   +1 614 760 4041

---

From: Philip Rakity <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:45:56 -0800 (PST)

Karl,

If we are going to make it a standard, then we should clean up
configuration.

The configure request should include a subtype for the type of protocol,
like ccpi and its mode of operation.  

 I would like to specify DES, or 3DES, as well as the mode of
operation Cipher Block Chaining or Electronic CookBook.  I cannot do this
at the moment.

regards,

Philip

---

From: Karl Fox <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:47:36 -0800

Are you saying that what we have is good enough for informational, but
not for standards track?  And what about all the shipping
implementations?

What do other folks think?  Should we change the protocol(s) now, or
push them forward?  There's been no discussion on DESE or 3DESE for
quite a while.