I've read the draft and favor adoption as a working group item. Although I can't speak for my company, I would push for, and expect, support to be added to a future product release once reviewed and advanced.
Jim Knowles -----Original Message----- From: IPsec [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 8:01 AM To: IPsecME WG Subject: Re: [IPsec] Call for WG adoption: draft-nir-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305 On Feb 26, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote: > Greetings again. A few people have expressed interest in having > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nir-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305 as a WG item > for IPsecME. If you want this as a WG document, and you are willing to review > drafts as they move through, please say so on this thread. If you are opposed > to this being a WG document, please say so (and say why). Thanks in advance. This got very little interest, which surprised me. Without a few more people who will commit to review the document and offer comments, we can't really call it a WG work item. Is there really so little interest in new algorithms that are being adopted in other protocols? If you are an IPsec implementer, it would be very useful to know whether or not you would support adding this algorithm to your implementation, and why. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
