Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9383 <draft-bar-cfrg-spake2plus-08> for your review

"Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)" <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org> Tue, 11 April 2023 22:10 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: auth48archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: auth48archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51AFCC1DF96B; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 15:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2IqyOqaCEyJA; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 15:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.99] (unknown [77.58.144.232]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2F74C1D258F; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 15:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <db11cb98-04d4-601d-7d61-799a88bd9410@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 00:10:07 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Lynne Bartholomew <lbartholomew@amsl.com>
Cc: Tim Taubert <ttaubert=40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Chris Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>, auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
References: <20230404051056.3B12E4C288@rfcpa.amsl.com> <138CE338-D683-4EA4-96F0-0707E04848DC@apple.com> <E75C81C2-8C57-4EEB-8E2A-9935F12A300B@amsl.com> <A0E20B4A-15DC-49EA-BB54-4957E01F1061@apple.com> <DC3CB27D-C891-4C36-9C34-D6ADDF11F5D3@amsl.com> <014346ED-F04D-491F-B607-31F9E4C53720@apple.com> <1066E889-97DA-4FE8-BED5-D632FF768C3D@amsl.com> <13e5873f-26b2-130a-dbb8-45eb3bfceaba@rfc-editor.org> <7D249FBC-06BD-4A84-878C-C630789EE3D4@amsl.com>
From: "Independent Submissions Editor (Eliot Lear)" <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <7D249FBC-06BD-4A84-878C-C630789EE3D4@amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/auth48archive/9X2tltH6y-8WkTMLLeVChQHzvCc>
Subject: Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9383 <draft-bar-cfrg-spake2plus-08> for your review
X-BeenThere: auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Archiving AUTH48 exchanges between the RFC Production Center, the authors, and other related parties" <auth48archive.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/auth48archive>, <mailto:auth48archive-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/>
List-Post: <mailto:auth48archive@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:auth48archive-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/auth48archive>, <mailto:auth48archive-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 22:10:15 -0000

On 11.04.23 22:46, Lynne Bartholomew wrote:
> Hi, Eliot.
>
> We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page:
>
>     https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9383
>
> Please note that if we later pick up on any changes to any lines containing "seed" in either of these documents, we will ask the authors about such changes.

Ok.


> In the meantime, apologies, but we're not sure what "it may be good to reference such values" means in your note below.

Apologies.  What I meant was that the authors could have referenced the 
appropriate section of RFc 9382 instead of repeating the values.  Let me 
tell you all what fun it was to compare several long strings of numbers ;-)

As to this:

> rfc9382.txt:   For P256:
> rfc9382.txt:   For P384:
> rfc9382.txt:   For P521:
> rfc9383.txt:   For P-256:
> rfc9383.txt:   For P-384:
> rfc9383.txt:   For P-521:

I believe RFC 9383 is correct, and is how NIST refers to the curves.

Also, as an aside, I hope it got corrected in production, but 9282 had 
"Table Table 1" in Section 6 of 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-cfrg-spake2-26.txt.

Eliot