[Babel-users] [babel] rather than ripemd160...

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf at gmail.com> writes:

> I feel strongly against making anything but SHA-256 mandatory to
> implement.

> It will delay publication

Not if there's already a draft we can simply refer to (like with
SHA-256); I do agree that we shouldn't be trying to pull Blake through
the IETF process if there isn't...

> and not improve the interoperability story.

Why not? If it's not MTI you risk the case where you get to pick between
"good performance on weak devices" and "interoperability with RFC-only
implementations".

-Toke