Re: [CFRG] Changes planned for the next VDAF draft

[Christopher Patton <[e-mail]>]

Hi all, here is a PR for the Prio3 improvement discussed above.
https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/pull/64

Cheers,
Chris P.

On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 8:07 AM Christopher Patton <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi CFRG,
>
> As you may have noticed, the RG recently adopted
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/. In this email I
> wanted to give you a heads up about the work the authors would like to get
> done before IETF 114. Please let us know if you object to any of these
> changes or if there is something else you'd like to see in the next draft.
>
>    - Complete spec for Poplar1 (as promised at IETF 113). This would
>    resolve https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/issues/22 and
>    https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/issues/44.
>    - Minor improvement to Prio3 that reduces communication overhead:
>    https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/issues/39. Note that this
>    scheme still requires security analysis.
>    - Define syntax of DAFs, i.e., VDAFs w/o verifiability:
>    https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/issues/20. This allows us
>    to avoid round trips over the network during the preparation phase in
>    applications where the clients are trusted to shard their inputs properly.
>    - Remove the public parameter from the syntax:
>    https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/issues/19. This feature
>    was included in order to make room for VDAFs that might use public key
>    cryptography. So far we have none, and the public parameter has turned out
>    to be a bit of a burden for PPM, which right now is the main application of
>    VDAFs.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris P.
>