Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "ec2n".
Did you mean:
ec2
2018 Jul 30
0
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
...ime field
? wap-wsg-idm-ecid-wtls9: WTLS curve over a 160 bit prime field
? wap-wsg-idm-ecid-wtls10: NIST/SECG/WTLS curve over a 233 bit binary field
? wap-wsg-idm-ecid-wtls11: NIST/SECG/WTLS curve over a 233 bit binary field
? wap-wsg-idm-ecid-wtls12: WTLS curve over a 224 bit prime field
? Oakley-EC2N-3:
??????? IPSec/IKE/Oakley curve #3 over a 155 bit binary field.
??????? Not suitable for ECDSA.
??????? Questionable extension field!
? Oakley-EC2N-4:
??????? IPSec/IKE/Oakley curve #4 over a 185 bit binary field.
??????? Not suitable for ECDSA.
??????? Questionable extension field!
? brainpoolP1...
2018 Jul 30
3
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
> On 30 July 2018 at 20:37 ????? <vtol at gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>>>>>> facing [ no shared cipher ] error with EC private keys.
> >>>>>> the client connecting to your instance has to support ecdsa
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> It does - Thunderbird 60.0b10 (64-bit)
>
2009 Feb 24
0
useR Group Meeting - London
All
Mango Solutions are pleased to announce the first meeting of the London
useR Group.
Date Tuesday 31st March
Time 4pm to 7pm
Venue The Wall
45 Old Broad St
London
EC2N 1HU
Tel 020 7588 4845
Speakers will include
* David Jessop UBS
* Markus Gesmann Lloyd's of London
* Pat Burns Burns Statistics
* Rory Winston The Research kitchen Ltd
This is a great opportunity to meet and mingle with other R users in the
Londo...
2018 Jul 30
2
2.3.2.1 - EC keys suppport?
.../SECG/WTLS curve over a 233 bit binary field
</div>
<div>
wap-wsg-idm-ecid-wtls11: NIST/SECG/WTLS curve over a 233 bit binary field
</div>
<div>
wap-wsg-idm-ecid-wtls12: WTLS curve over a 224 bit prime field
</div>
<div>
Oakley-EC2N-3:
</div>
<div>
IPSec/IKE/Oakley curve #3 over a 155 bit binary field.
</div>
<div>
Not suitable for ECDSA.
</div>
<div>
Questionable extension field!
</div>
<div>
Oakley-EC2N-4:
<...
2001 Dec 10
10
hang on exit bug under Linux
>From what I understand, the problem is due to people's disagreement about what the "correct" behavior should be. I'm pretty sure that the following is the correct behavior from running rsh and ssh often (both fsecure and openssh).
Lets say you have a stupid script that does
while 1
do
sleep 1
done
Called foreverSleep on your remote host:
rsh remotehost