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

[David Schinazi]

>
>
> 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".
>

Where are these "RFC-only implementations" of Babel?
Remember the IETF does not have a protocol police, MTI is purely guidance.
Implementors build what they (or their customers) need for their use-case.
Implementors will add Blake if they need it, not based on whether it's MTI
or not.
Lastly, remember that this is a security solution, so you do NOT want to
interoperate with a future theoretical implementation, because that will
not have the keys. Adding any new node in the network will require a
provisioning step, and that step ensures the new node supports the
required features.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/babel-users/attachments/20181128/0cb09cf6/attachment.html>