Op 02-12-2020 om 23:31 schreef Stephen Farrell: <snip> > FWIW, I'd say it's worth a few more words to try reduce > the probability of such failures happening, e.g. maybe > just highlighting the "unsigned/2106" point you made > above would be enough. But, if the WG don't want to do > that, that's also fine by me. Sure, NP. I'll include Brian Dicksen's provided clarification in the text. Also, I approached Jean-Philippe Aumasson and he fixed the url we used in the draft for SipHash, but recommends to use this one in the future: https://www.aumasson.jp/siphash/ So I'll change that too. Cheers, -- Willem -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
