Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com
 (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6F571AE400 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Thu,  9 Jan 2014 07:37:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No,
 score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9,
 HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lOYECTsxGU2j for
 <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu,  9 Jan 2014 07:37:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM
 [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id
 00E401AE3EC for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu,  9 Jan 2014 07:37:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-51-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com
 [50.1.51.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.7/8.14.7)
 with ESMTP id s09FHW7W040206 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128
 verify=NO);
 Thu, 9 Jan 2014 08:17:34 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host
 50-1-51-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.51.230] claimed to be
 [10.20.30.90]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cn4paZTmeVExn+na0MwzdvSn+MF_bmyRZ869pJrWb_8Bg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 07:37:27 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5EF1DF9B-496A-4F02-ACCB-3BCE25F220D4@vpnc.org>
References: <CACsn0cn4paZTmeVExn+na0MwzdvSn+MF_bmyRZ869pJrWb_8Bg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Safecurves draft redux
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>,
 <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>,
 <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 15:37:44 -0000

On Jan 9, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> wrote:

> The naming issue is fine: we can say "the safecurve Mxxx has been
> found to be unsafe" without risk of being misunderstood.

Not at all. Having "safecurve Mxxx" be found unsafe will make many =
people think that all the other curves are unsafe.

The IETF has a long history of naming coming back to bite us in the =
butt. Please strongly consider getting rid of the "safecurve" name and =
just using the actual names that Dan an Tanja use.

--Paul Hoffman=