Re: [Cfrg] New names for draft-ladd-safecurves

Jon Callas <jon@callas.org> Tue, 21 January 2014 04:12 UTC

Return-Path: <jon@callas.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 193521A0296 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:12:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 O5PHuTv-1NuT for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.merrymeet.com (merrymeet.com [173.164.244.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589601A0030 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.merrymeet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70D3B4B74148 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at merrymeet.com
Received: from mail.merrymeet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (merrymeet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NJAL1pA+2SnT for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from keys.merrymeet.com (keys.merrymeet.com [173.164.244.97]) by mail.merrymeet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24E7E4B7413C for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.19.131.128] ([12.130.127.5]) by keys.merrymeet.com (PGP Universal service); Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800
X-PGP-Universal: processed; by keys.merrymeet.com on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:59 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Jon Callas <jon@callas.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cn0938BHMs7uFJYeB_q2VcGQULcF8fzc7KR67A_+mqzLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:11:52 -0800
Message-Id: <FE139AEA-3D7A-4445-8669-B5A0578A1C8B@callas.org>
References: <CACsn0ck02mnETBUfuyJjLV9K8Yuiki8_-RG0tVszL8BDhkK27w@mail.gmail.com> <6489F7D3-BF54-416F-94BE-64FD1CFCCB1E@callas.org> <CACsn0cn0938BHMs7uFJYeB_q2VcGQULcF8fzc7KR67A_+mqzLw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
X-PGP-Encoding-Format: Partitioned
X-PGP-Encoding-Version: 2.0.2
X-Content-PGP-Universal-Saved-Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-PGP-Universal-Saved-Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>, Jon Callas <jon@callas.org>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] New names for draft-ladd-safecurves
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: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:12:01 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:54 PM, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Really, there's no reason to designate in the name an Edwards curve from a Montgomery, especially because in the implementation someone's probably going to flip between representations. Only us math weenies really care about the representation, and you're going to confuse the coders.
> 
> If I hand you a string of bytes, what point does that represent and on
> what curve does it fall? Seems to me like that's a representation
> issue we should all care about.

I think that's *the* issue we should care about.

> 
>> 
>> I spent time talking to Dan and Tanja this weekend at ShmooCon about this sort of thing and I think that our agreement was that names like "Curve 255-19" (which covers both Curve25519 and Ed25519) or "Curve 414-17" (for the curve formerly known as Curve3617) made sense.
> 
> This would be great except that we want both Edwards and Montgomery
> wire formats. If there is consensus on only Edwards wire formats, that
> naming will work fine.

Is the name the right place to solve this?

That's not rhetorical, I'm genuinely asking. If you give me a short description of how you'd handle it, I'm liable to just say, "Oh, yeah."

	Jon



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 3.2.0 (Build 1672)
Charset: us-ascii

wj8DBQFS3fOPsTedWZOD3gYRAn03AKD/s836HVoHLjfRM4zIVh1cyZ9qEACdFzjb
qaoM7mQC5ayNuJV3eJWeACw=
=lO2p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----