Re: des-cbc cipher

[Darren Moffat <Darren.Moffat%eng.sun.com@localhost>]

>DES isn't the issue per se, despite the attempts of you and some 
>to cloud the interoperability issue.  Broad interoperability of

I'm certainly not trying to cloud the issue and I don't think others
are either.  Myself and others are only pointing out that the protocol
already allows for additional algorithms and implementing des-cbc
is certainly possible using that mechanism.  Nothing addtional has
to be added to the drafts to add the functionality.

>any IETF standards-track protocol is crucially important to me.
>That alone justifies documenting how DES-CBC works, even if it is 
>marked as deprecated, optional-to-implement, or what have you.
>(And I don't care if those sorts of recommendations are made,
>provided it is clearly documented in the RFC).

Given the reaction to this on the list I doubt you are going to get
consensus - but I maybe wrong.  I suggest you log a personal submission
that references the relevant sections from the core drafts, you could
then ask if the secsh-wg is willing to take it on as a working group draft.

Since we are trying to get last call on the core drafts it is unfortunate
timing regardless of the issues of appropriateness, but not too late
if you get agreement from the group.

I suggest this be brought up at the SLC IETF meeting as an agenda item.

--
Darren J Moffat