On 10/22/2015 2:52 AM, Tim Whittington wrote:
> draft-agl-tls-chacha20poly1305-04 moved on (incompatibly) to
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mavrogiannopoulos-chacha-tls, which
> has since moved on to
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-chacha20-poly1305-00.
>
Yes. Good that the new
draft-agl-tls-chacha20poly1305-04 moved on (incompatibly) to https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mavrogiannopoulos-chacha-tls, which has since moved on to https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-chacha20-poly1305-00.timOn 13/10/2015, at 3:14 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:Were ChaCha20 and Poly1305 based c
Hi,
the first point is this suite is maybe only draft, but it is used in
chrome an the strongest suite supported in chrome.
GCM suites are only support in 128bit version,so this was the "request"
to implement it.
The second point is yes this was the only technical problem to get it
running.
Ot
A couple comments:
> Were ChaCha20 and Poly1305 based cipher suites accepted as IETF RFC?
> Looks like the proposal was not moving forward since May, 2014.
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-agl-tls-chacha20poly1305-04
AFAIK, CHACHA20/Poly1305 based suites were never issued ciphersuite n
Were ChaCha20 and Poly1305 based cipher suites accepted as IETF RFC?
Looks like the proposal was not moving forward since May, 2014.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-agl-tls-chacha20poly1305-04
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 10/11/2015 3:59 PM, Thomas Lußnig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when i extends "sun.securit
