I'm happy with the outcome. The list discussion addressed the issue. I
believe the outcome is: "The plaintext attack is resistible, not a real
problem, and need not be addressed in the document."
Tom Taylor
On 06/09/2014 11:37 AM, Tom Henderson wrote:
On 09/06/2014 08:25 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
It looks like the latest rev of 5201-bis does not address the gen-art
review comments nor Francis Dupont's comments, and I haven't seen any
follow-up discussion on Francis' comments. What do the authors
believe the status of these two comment threads is?
Ted,
I believe that there is only one open issue left from the Gen-Art
review, regarding possible plaintext attacks:
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hip/trac/ticket/42
The list discussion on this issue leans against making any change; see
the last message of this thread:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/current/msg03903.html
I think I previously handled all of the other comments; if I missed any,
please point them out.
I have tried to contact Francis a couple of times regarding
clarification of his comments and have not seen a reply. This is
tracked in issue:
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hip/trac/ticket/49
I'm cc'ing both Tom Taylor and Francis for any further clarifications.
- Tom
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
