-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 11/03/2014 19:32, Dan Brown wrote:
> […]I was asking whether they are in scope, or priorities, of > IETF.[…] I'm certainly no process expert, but probably? Advice on secure RNG practices in RFC 4086 seems to have been considered in-scope for IETF before. This list exists to discuss randomness, where it impacts IETF protocols. It's definitely not something we should ignore: and given what we've seen, and how fundamental good randomness is to good security, I would firmly argue not something we should defer to other, less transparent, bodies in future. - -- /akr -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTH2aZAAoJEOyEjtkWi2t67D4QAJ8U1ukEi6SslqFXGz63NVdR EptXLGET+ClamZlXOuFMjins1wGwEJ67ItNgv68qRRmaSmbmiAU181HHir/e4pTl PpCh+yczIvcDI56X1eR6b7zDMMgwaV5g6iymMaBnGH4bOcMsa5jy/pYvICT3exTG L1tuj0RcjrQMyAAXS1+VxS0mSAye/lb4dtL29foCwHRgDw66nxTQvKx4ltQIEb9c DGj8A7FPxxDcUP5yoIvnHT7tkDhLCYqvUBdJ36gaU2XsjJKTXBXUmZT4hbAUolzY fkYPZF1LNaSxsBfMZlWIwxaqjYZhY6OQjXLuSI7mvXD9L/EApVKyrC5LXMa9ulfi BQv9D4NFOw5PyhmA0vKajbKoSZ7nXXPGzCVOmIcBnbcMM3bk/DBoSUqsBSd/ODF7 sKwDOgpbyyxh5nMVyieoHQidyunPllhVVQyCk9iBSuTo2kPxPcMLva2VWhMobPrA QYr2hTrz3MWz8SJJXx8uE41sucPzE9K23mPI19b2P9tCtHbbZU6sQurryzDfHex6 N/EGNFvfb7QjoJzgmUtuG0Gi7Klrkfa6rOr6fDuY0Xfp1x1UBCI5quhs8BfsfXYQ tHQkmWZrFaUOzOGYkG6DHDyZ3+HXtN65yk3lwswH1+AuPkGyJYO8+oko7Gjm6F0U jx1PYN7/uy7/ygwaw7KY =6UUk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ dsfjdssdfsd mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dsfjdssdfsd
