Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-P1619] 1619r

Hi Glen,

This is a good point that we missed earlier.  I think we can handle this in one of two ways:

  1. Revert the text to its previous contents, or
  2. Remove the first sentence so that the limit is now unambiguously 2^20 per data unit.
I recommend that we take the second option because this is more in line with NIST SP 800-38E (see which reads:

"The length of the data unit for any instance of an implementation of XTS-AES shall not exceed 2^20 AES blocks. Note that Subclause 5.1 of Ref.[2] recommends this limit but does not require it."

One of the goals of this revision is to make IEEE 1619rev and NIST SP 800-38E more in alignment, and this change would work towards that goal.

Would anyone object if we removed the first sentence (as in option 2) as an editorial change before starting Sponsor Ballot?


On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:07 PM, Glen Jaquette <jaquette@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I apologize for missing the telecon.  But I have a question.  Previously, the only thing keeping the last two full sentences of this excerpt of 1619 was the words "shall" in the 1st and "should" in the 2nd,   This draft proposes to replace "should" with "shall" in the 2nd of those sentences -- which only then begs the question of why the modified 2nd sentence (i.e. with the "shall" is not a direct contradiction of the sentence which precedes it?

                  Glen Jaquette

Phone;   (520) 352-9146


Matt Ball
Cell: 303-717-2717

GIF image