1995-08-10 - Re: Why DES in IPSEC ESP?

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@panix.com>
To: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Message Hash: c0775ec1e3891807f036ff86755e363bbb40f1db1cc9ba28be8b7c3044f8977d
Message ID: <199508101525.LAA06371@panix4.panix.com>
Reply To: <199508101327.JAA14573@bwh.harvard.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1995-08-10 15:25:44 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 10 Aug 95 08:25:44 PDT

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@panix.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 95 08:25:44 PDT
To: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: Why DES in IPSEC ESP?
In-Reply-To: <199508101327.JAA14573@bwh.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <199508101525.LAA06371@panix4.panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Adam Shostack writes:
> choosing a second algorithm is a difficult, and political task.
[...]
> So, in order to ship sooner rather than later, DES was chosen.

Well, if you define "ship" as "get the standards approved" you have
the situation nailed. We basically could all agree on DES and the
marketplace will dictate that in practice everyone has 3DES and other
things available too.

Perry

Thread

• Return to August 1995

• Return to “Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>”
• Return to “Andy Brown <asb@nexor.co.uk>”

• Return to ““Perry E. Metzger” <perry@panix.com>”

• 1995-08-10 (Thu, 10 Aug 95 05:48:09 PDT) - Why DES in IPSEC ESP? - Andy Brown <asb@nexor.co.uk>
  • 1995-08-10 (Thu, 10 Aug 95 06:28:38 PDT) - Re: Why DES in IPSEC ESP? - Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
    • 1995-08-10 (Thu, 10 Aug 95 08:25:44 PDT) - Re: Why DES in IPSEC ESP? - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@panix.com>
  • 1995-08-10 (Thu, 10 Aug 95 08:26:57 PDT) - Re: Why DES in IPSEC ESP? - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@panix.com>