Return-Path: X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A8D7C14CEFC for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:03:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.406 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.406 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=csperkins.org 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 2TFjxdECcArD for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.mythic-beasts.com (mx1.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:86:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F2B5C16940C for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:03:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=csperkins.org; s=mythic-beasts-k1; h=Date:Subject:To:From; bh=TxMoM0iT4zHu1VdSBQkZyPxlcJjQyG7twXxLGANqE8c=; b=VWrXdk+kUzg5Rtd3F0Uoc3D5ag BA1fQ3pZQpcF/3yWrb+KqCdu3O1aJq0PUquvGkL24ivzPWhQ7AcRDzCQ0rUXInqFn8uf8bN//LA0w DAjIJ92HYcZFIqBmSi3EcGSmvbTer2mnjVmqnqnBl4TGXlES/bHZHWJS12xwLeCoqWonj29HEyE/9 iaqfXQVlMs3wikZwYRVD/P/BwcaOxgjXTleVnBElAmLnZRGwKjBHJRx3E26z6WXYDlGr1frWZwKJA 8WrbHgFqnuU3tewb1Iuif+akO/ghDed9+O5LVyfdXR8WCnQPodxyED1uV2w1yfOSnzGWed/SP+C2x T40jTT1g==; Received: by mailhub-cam-d.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1srh2s-0016sA-9h; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 18:03:50 +0100 From: Colin Perkins To: Christopher Patton Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 18:03:47 +0100 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r6065) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_3A11293E-39BF-4433-8F43-C85FCB90EA49_=" Embedded-HTML: [{"plain":[196,881],"uuid":"F14734CF-0569-4607-88A4-B73971CA7394"}] X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 9 Message-ID-Hash: EMLCTMEVGWYMSHOXWYETHZ4XZTEZKW3V X-Message-ID-Hash: EMLCTMEVGWYMSHOXWYETHZ4XZTEZKW3V X-MailFrom: csp@csperkins.org X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-cfrg.irtf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: CFRG X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4 Precedence: list Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BCFRG=5D_Re=3A_Where_should_test_vectors_live=3F?= List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --=_MailMate_3A11293E-39BF-4433-8F43-C85FCB90EA49_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, The datatracker has an =E2=80=9CAdditional resources=E2=80=9D field for e= ach draft, = that can be used to cross-reference to GitHub repos, etc. Colin On 20 Sep 2024, at 1:17, Christopher Patton wrote: > Hi CFRG, > > It occurred to me today that our drafts often have human-friendly test > vectors that look something like this: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9180#appendix-A.1.1 > > These aren't super convenient for a machine. In theory you could write = > a > script that downloads https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9180.txt and = > write > a parser to pull out the test vectors, but does anyone really do this? > Luckily for RFC 9180 we have a JSON version to work with instead: > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-hpke/refs/heads/= master/test-vectors.json > > How do folks feel about pointing to machine readable test vectors from = > an > RFC in lieu of producing human-friendly, but machine-unfriendly in the > appendix? Suppose for example an RFC had a pointer to a JSON blob = > somewhere > on datatracker. Is this feasible/desirable? > > Thanks, > Chris P. > _______________________________________________ > CFRG mailing list -- cfrg@irtf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to cfrg-leave@irtf.org --=_MailMate_3A11293E-39BF-4433-8F43-C85FCB90EA49_= Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

The datatracker has an =E2=80=9CAdditional resources=E2=80= =9D field for each draft, that can be used to cross-reference to GitHub r= epos, etc.

Colin


On 20 Sep 2024, at 1:17, Christopher Patton wrote:

Hi CFRG,

It occurred to me today that our drafts often have human-friendly te= st vectors that look something like this:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9180#appendix-A.1.1

These aren't super convenient for a machine. In theory you could wri= te a script that downloads https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9180.txt and write a parse= r to pull out the test vectors, but does anyone really do this? Luckily f= or RFC 9180 we have a JSON version to work with instead:

How do folks feel about pointing to machine readable test vectors fr= om an RFC in lieu of producing human-friendly, but machine-unfriendly in = the appendix? Suppose for example an RFC had a pointer to a JSON blob som= ewhere on datatracker. Is this feasible/desirable?

Thanks,
Chris P.

________________________= _______________________
CFRG mailing list -- cfrg@irtf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to cfrg-leave@irtf.org

--=_MailMate_3A11293E-39BF-4433-8F43-C85FCB90EA49_=--