[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    RE: iSCSI: New Lucent stmt on SRP

    >> From: Amir Shalit []
    >> Does [the new Lucent letter] solve the SRP dilemma?
    At 01:58 PM 3/29/02 -0500, wrote:
    >Not completely, but it helps. ...
    David, can you elaborate on how it helps, what is missing, etc.?
    >... The IESG is now requesting
    >that the WG consider use of a version of CHAP strengthened
    >by an anonymous Diffie-Hellman key exchange as an alternative
    >to SRP. ...
    I'm not sure what "alternative" means in this context.  An alternative
    "option" in addition to something like SRP would achieve the
    goal of guaranteed free interoperability.  Or has the IESG suggested
    "replacement", which is something else entirely?
    >Ted Ts'o has done us the favor of posting many of the issues
    >that the IESG expects the WG to consider in his post from
    >this past Wednesday:
    Have these IESG requests to the WG and expectations of the WG
    been formally posted directly to the list?  It would be nice to
    know what the other issues are too, that weren't included in
    Ted's post.
    >I would hope that a strawman design for this mechanism
    >could be posted in the next week, and apologize for the
    >delay ... I'm afraid that all attempts to clone me have
    >failed, and I need to ensure that some real cryptographers
    >check the resulting design before it is posted  ;-).
    As legitimate review is an open process, I assume your wink
    means that the secret initial checking by "real cryptographers"
    is just a necessary first step.  Ted's post has stimulated an
    initial thread of security discussion, which can continue
    after the design is posted.
    -- David


Last updated: Mon Apr 01 11:18:24 2002
9407 messages in chronological order