Subject: aes draft submitted

From: Ken Raeburn <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 22:08:18 -0400

http://www.mit.edu/~raeburn/draft-raeburn-krb-rijndael-krb-04.txt
has a copy.

It's been updated for wg-last-call comments, id-nits, etc.

Changes from -03 to -04:

    Added "PBKDF2 HMAC-SHA1" in text above test vectors, so search
    engines will find the terms close together.

    Remove a stray comma.

    Order and number sections as indicated in rfc2233bis-05.

    Remove Document History section.

    Update notes to RFC Editor, to request removal of working group as
    contact point when publishing as an RFC.

That last change (remove [email-masked] as contact address when
going to RFC) I also requested in the crypto draft.  Several years
from now, it may not be the correct contact point, or the list may
have moved.

Several of the RFCs I checked did not appear to list the working group
as a contact point.  At least one did, though.  Do people think I
should leave it in?  Where should it go?  (The Abstract section on the
front page is probably not right...)

Ken

---

From: Ken Raeburn <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 14:57:47 -0400

Oh, that was stupid of me.  I left out the most important change, the
reason for the revision -- the adjustment of the default PBKDF2
iteration count to 4K, and related text...  New version going in soon.
*sigh*

Ken