Re: WG Last Call: SHA-224

[Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul:

> At 8:21 AM -0500 3/29/04, Russ Housley wrote:
> > I understand that the computation expense is the same as SHA-256. 
> > However, as you point out, there are times that a shorter hash value is 
> > desirable.
>
> Do we agree that the only times where it is desirable is in severely 
> bandwidth-restricted environments? Or am I missing some other scenario?

It is also useful is you want all of the algorithms in a cipher suite to 
offer the same strength.  I remember a SAAG discussion that this was called 
"impedance match," but I do not particularly like that term.

Russ