Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: >> If those doing IP over Amateur Radio are a use case, they require >> NULL.
> If Amateur Radio's prohibition on encryption is considered to be
> important in making decisions about crypto in protocols, then I think
> we are in a situation where we can't have crypto protocols that don't
> disallow downgrade attacks, because implementations always have to be
> willing to downgrade to no encryption if the other endpoint is an
> Amateur Radio station.
Ted, you are assuming that there are no policy knobs at all.
We are talking about IPsec ESP, as required by HIP, not UTA/TLS here.
I don't understand this fear that policy knobs will accidentally get
unstuck and start accepting something weaker without administrator
involvement.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
pgpd2gZJ_Y9Ab.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
