|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
The referred RFCs were approved in May 2006.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
The message integrity code (MIC) is calculated according to this RFC.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
None (see https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?draft=&rfc=4493&submit=rfc)
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
This RFC is in force since June 2006 and has no associated errata.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
Informational
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
None
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
- NIST, Special Publication 800-38B, "Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: The CMAC Mode for Authentication", May 2005./
- NIST, FIPS 197, "Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)", November 2001. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips197/fips-197.pdf/
- Eastlake, D., 3rd, Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086, June 2005.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
None
|
