<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">either way. My point is that there should be no ambiguity in the spec.<div><br></div><div><div apple-content-edited="true">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Yingdi</div></div></span></span></div><br><div><div>On Sep 19, 2014, at 10:09 PM, Tai-Lin Chu <<a href="mailto:tailinchu@gmail.com">tailinchu@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">just some hmac facts:<br>1. if key is longer than block size, key = hash(key)<br>2. if key is shorter than block size, key = key pad with zeros<br><br>It might be better if the doc simply says that "standard hmac with<br>sha256 hash is used". hmac has so many details, and we should not<br>redocument them again.<br><br>On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Yingdi Yu <<a href="mailto:yingdi@cs.ucla.edu">yingdi@cs.ucla.edu</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Hi Adeola,<br><br>It is great that we have a proposal for HMAC, a few comments about the doc.<br><br>1. I think you should mentioned in the spec that how to handle keys that are<br>longer than the hash output.<br>2. we should either disable keys that are shorter than hash output or still<br>state how to generate HMAC when a key is short. Just "discourage" is not<br>enough.<br><br>Yingdi<br><br>On Sep 19, 2014, at 11:12 AM, Adeola Bannis <<a href="mailto:thecodemaiden@gmail.com">thecodemaiden@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>Hello all,<br><br>I am proposing to add an HMAC type, using SHA256 as the hash function, to<br>the signature types defined at<br><a href="http://named-data.net/doc/NDN-TLV/current/signature.html">http://named-data.net/doc/NDN-TLV/current/signature.html</a>. This will enable<br>communication with symmetric keys, which reduces the signing and<br>verification load on resource-constrained devices.<br><br>The proposal is attached. Please review it and reply with any comments or<br>suggestions.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Adeola<br><TLV_spec_HMAC_SHA256.docx>_______________________________________________<br>Ndn-interest mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ndn-interest@lists.cs.ucla.edu">Ndn-interest@lists.cs.ucla.edu</a><br>http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/ndn-interest<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Ndn-interest mailing list<br>Ndn-interest@lists.cs.ucla.edu<br>http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/ndn-interest<br><br></blockquote></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>