Hi Johannes, Some quick comments:
I strongly encourage you to remove the "Compressed" point format. Doing so will minimize the changes between RFC 5903 and make the draft easier to support, and improve the overall implementation by making it simpler. Also, it is not clear that there is any advantage to the "compressed" format. It saves at most 64 bytes in total for a complete IKEv2 key establishment, and since IKEv2 exchanges typically send a lot more data than that, it sounds like a false economy to add complexity in order to avoid a little bit of data. The paragraph starting "The corresponding twisted curves ..." is a distinct and self-contained topic. I suggest putting it into its own section. In some places, the draft gives [SEC1] as a normative reference, where RFC6090 is also applicable (Sections 4.1 and 6 apply jn Section 2.2 of draft-merkle-ikev2-ke-brainpool, for instance). David On 11/5/12 8:35 AM, "Johannes Merkle" <[email protected]> wrote: >We have submitted a new revision of the Internet Draft Using the ECC >Brainpool Curves (defined in RFC 5639) for IKEv2 >Key Exchange >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-merkle-ikev2-ke-brainpool/ > >Last week, this draft has also been submitted to the Independent >Submission Editor. > >The draft specifies 4 new code points for the IKEv2 transform ID registry >(224, 256, 384 and 512 bit curve) and >specifies the encoding of the KE payload with and without point >compression. The test vectors are shared with Dan's >draft on IKEv1 >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-harkins-brainpool-ike-groups-01. I have >removed the "twisted curves" and >included a note how to use them internally (for efficient implementation) >using input / output transformations. > >Any feedback is welcome. > >-- >Johannes >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
