Re: AES cipher suites

[David Waitzman <djw@xxxxxxx>]

Scott G. Kelly wrote:
> Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I have the impression that the
> general thrust of this thread has been to *replace* AES-CBC with
> AES-CTR. There is currently an AES-CBC document in the IESG's doc queue
> that is a product of this wg, and based on that doc, hardware has been
> released and products have been shipped. That means that if we toss it
> out now, lots of time and money has been wasted. I hope that I really
> have misunderstood.

I think you misunderstand the IETF standardization process.
I thought the way it worked is that if you ship a product based upon just 
an I-D you are taking a big gamble.  Even after DRAFT Standard things could 
  change if there's a big problem.

This should be a motivation for IETF working groups to test 
interoperability and standardize *quickly*.  Yes, the RFC standardization 
process has long hold times in it, to give time for feedback.  But this 
should level the playing field.


-david