Subject: [Fwd: Re: Reminder: automated key management is often required for new protocols]

From: "David B. Nelson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:23:53 -0500

Forwarding to the RADEXT list for a non-subscriber.

Sam Hartman wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> I think that the applicability of RFC 4107 to radius crypto agility
> work is kind of complicated.
> 
> I guess my main question is who is driving the work, who will use it.
> 
> My personal opinion is that updating radius crypto agility without
> adding some form of automated key management doesn't have a lot of
> value and may not be worth doing.
> 
> However if there are users and implementers who see the value in doing
> the crypto agility updates, then perhaps it makes sense to do.
> 
> So, my question to you is what is driving this work besides a desire
> to be good security citizens?
> 

Subject: Re: Reminder: automated key management is often required for new protocols
From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
To: "David B. Nelson" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:47:33 -0500

Hi.

I think that the applicability of RFC 4107 to radius crypto agility
work is kind of complicated.

I guess my main question is who is driving the work, who will use it.

My personal opinion is that updating radius crypto agility without
adding some form of automated key management doesn't have a lot of
value and may not be worth doing.

However if there are users and implementers who see the value in doing
the crypto agility updates, then perhaps it makes sense to do.

So, my question to you is what is driving this work besides a desire
to be good security citizens?