Tero Kivinen writes:
> I would like to add one more there, i.e., ESN sent as 64-bit sequence
> number (i.e. transmitting full ESN value in packet) in such way that you
> send lower 32-bits first, and then you add upper 32-bits of the ESN
> between SN and payload data, i.e., there wo
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 08:09:31AM +, Panwei (William) wrote:
> Tero Kivinen writes:
> > I would like to add one more there, i.e., ESN sent as 64-bit sequence
> > number (i.e. transmitting full ESN value in packet) in such way that you
> > send lower 32-bits first, and then you add
Steffen Klassert writes:
> That said, if we want to transmit the 64-bit sequence number
> in ESP, I'd prefer to transmit the upper 32-bits before
> the lower 32-bits. That's easier on the imlementation side.
The difference in implementations is minimal, but sending lower
32-bits first keeps the ES
Paul Wouters writes:
> > On the other hand I do think Group 14 is something that most likely
> > needs to be updated...
>
> Yes, some standards like PCI are sun setting finite field DH. The
> question is what to make the new MTI, a NIST curve or a non-NIST
> curve (or both). My guess would be to p
Steffen Klassert wrote:
> That said, if we want to transmit the 64-bit sequence number
> in ESP, I'd prefer to transmit the upper 32-bits before
> the lower 32-bits. That's easier on the imlementation side.
My naive notions about cache-line optimizations, I'd think that one could
sta
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 10:28 AM Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Paul Wouters writes:
> > > On the other hand I do think Group 14 is something that most likely
> > > needs to be updated...
> >
> > Yes, some standards like PCI are sun setting finite field DH. The
> > question is what to make the new MTI, a
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 10:09 AM Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> The difference in implementations is minimal, but sending lower
> 32-bits first keeps the ESP backward compatible with different
> firewall, deep packet inspection etc middleboxes, which might check
> sequence number and filter stuff if it
Paul Wouters writes:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 10:09 AM Tero Kivinen wrote:
>
> The difference in implementations is minimal, but sending lower
> 32-bits first keeps the ESP backward compatible with different
> firewall, deep packet inspection etc middleboxes, which might check
>
Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Having lower 32-bits first will allow checking those bits even before
> the upper bits are even received.. On the other hand I do not think
> there is any difference in hardware as you most likely want to check
> ICV first anyways before checking replay windo
