Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx> writes: >Overflowing by another 32 bits is hardly the same as "there was only room >for" If you've decided that the size is going to be 192 bits and, due to other changes, you have only 96 bits left, I don't see how this is anything other than "there was only room for". You can't get 128 bits into 96 no matter how hard you try. Could we perhaps get past the semantic nitpicking and back to the normal bikeshedding? Or at least take it off-list? Peter. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf