Subject: Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] WG Last Call: draft-lha-des-die-die-die-02

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:36:05 -0400

--On Friday, March 26, 2010 06:21:04 PM -0700 Jeffrey Hutzelman 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>>  This document removes the mandatory-to-implement types from [RFC4120]
>>  when used in conjunction with DES-CBC-MD5: Checksums: DES-MD5(7)
>
> There is some confusion here.  RFC4120 refers repeatedly to a cksumtype
> of the name "DES-MD5", but there is in fact no such cksumtype.  The
> mandatory-to-implement cksumtype for DES-CBC-MD5 is actually named
> RSA-MD5-DES and has cksumtype 8; this is not the same as RSA-MD5(7).

This seems to have been addressed in the text I quoted.  However, it still 
says implementations SHOULD NOT implement "DES-MD5(7)", and then goes on to 
explain that there are cases where RSA-MD5 is still needed in some cases 
and that implementors should be careful not to inadvertently disable it.

We should not be saying not to implement "DES-MD5(7)"; there is no such 
thing.  Checksum type 7 is RSA-MD5, which we _do_ want people to continue 
to implement, and does not involve any use of DES.

If there are no objections, I think we can remove "DES-MD5(7)" from the 
list via an RFC-Editor note or a post-IETF-LC update.  I see nothing else 
preventing us from moving this document forward.

-- Jeff
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg