The ARIA Algorithm and Its Use with the Secure Real-Time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
RFC 8269

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 10 and is now closed.

(Ben Campbell) Yes

Comment (2017-07-07 for -10)
No email
send info
I think it would be wise to add a paragraph to the security considerations to call out the dependency on SHA1. A mention of what would need to happen to migrate to newer hash functions could also be helpful.

(Alia Atlas) No Objection

Deborah Brungard No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

Suresh Krishnan No Objection

Warren Kumari No Objection

Comment (2017-07-29 for -10)
No email
send info
I agree with most of Ben Laurie's SecDir comments, and Ben's questions on SHA-1, but will leave it to the Sec ADs to evaluate.

Mirja K├╝hlewind No Objection

Comment (2017-07-31 for -10)
No email
send info
This actually looks more like a document that we would rather typically publish by the ISE (as it is describing a method employed by one specific entity only). I do not object to it publication as informational and I do understand that this mostly due to the registration the in the MIKEY registry, however, i would like to note that IESG Approval would have been another option for this registration.

(Terry Manderson) No Objection

Alexey Melnikov No Objection

Comment (2017-08-01 for -10)
No email
send info
+1 regarding SHA-1

(Kathleen Moriarty) No Objection

Comment (2017-08-02 for -10)
No email
send info
Although this is not a discuss, I think updated text would be very helpful on the following two issues.

I agree with the SecDir reviewer that there should be more text around the short tag length in the security considerations section.  I don't see a response to that post though.

For SHA-1, a reference to RFC6194 for the security considerations for SHA-1message digest algorithms would be helpful.  
Thank you!

(Eric Rescorla) No Objection