Curve25519 and Curve448 for the Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) Key Agreement
RFC 8031

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.

(Stephen Farrell) Yes

Comment (2016-10-13)
No email
send info
- Wouldn't it be good to encourage minimising re-use of
public values for multiple key exchanges? As-is, the text
sort-of encourages use for "many key exchanges" in
section 4.

- Sorry if I'm forgetting how we handle this in IPsec,
but is an implementation of this RFC expected to support
both curves? I think it'd be ok to say that 25519 is a
MUST for folks doing, this but that 448 is optional.  I'm
also fine if we mean that implementing this means you
have to support both btw but you don't say (here) that
that's the case.

(Alexey Melnikov) Yes

(Kathleen Moriarty) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Alia Atlas) No Objection

(Deborah Brungard) No Objection

(Ben Campbell) No Objection

(Benoît Claise) No Objection

(Alissa Cooper) No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

(Joel Jaeggli) No Objection

(Suresh Krishnan) No Objection

(Mirja Kühlewind) No Objection