Hi Russ, At the upcoming IEEE 802.15 meeting in Orlando, we (vendors using IEEE 802.15.4) plan a presentation on support for AES-256 in an upcoming version of the 802.15.4 standard.
In the Wi-SUN Alliance, we are using TLS-ECDHE-ECDSA-WITH-AES-128-CCM-8 now. It would be great to at least not prevent support for a longer key version of that going forward. Don Sturek From: TLS <tls-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Russ Housley <hous...@vigilsec.com> Date: Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 6:56 AM To: Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> Cc: IETF TLS <tls@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [TLS] Should CCM_8 CSs be Recommended? > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:48 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On 4 Oct 2017, at 16:29, Russ Housley <hous...@vigilsec.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2017, at 3:30 AM, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> (IoT) - This requirement is for interoperability with IoT. Only >>> 128-bit keys are at the given level. >> If the IoT environment is willing to accept lower integrity protection in >> order to save a few bits on the wire/ether, I do not see why the >> specification also forces them from using a larger key size. > > Maybe to save a few cycles in addition to the few bits? They claimed that the > one AEAD cipher they needed was AES_CCM_8 with a 128-bit key, because that was > all that their hardware supports. > > What we are saying is that if you want your (in that case IPsec, but it¹s no > different for TLS) to work with IoT devices, you need that AEAD cipher. Right, but is there any reason to restrict CCM_8 to 128-bit keys in the IANA registry entry? I can't see one. Russ _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
