Re: [Cfrg] Safecurves draft

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cfrg [mailto:cfrg-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of Dan Harkins
...
> On Wed, January 8, 2014 9:58 am, Watson Ladd wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Stephen Farrell
> > <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 01/08/2014 05:11 PM, Watson Ladd wrote:
> >>> Dear all,
> >>> draft-ladd-safecurves contains the Safecurves with orders
> >>> 2^255+\epsilon and higher.
> >>> I forgot to update the TOC, but that shouldn't stop the substantive
> >>> conversation.
> >>>
> >>> Does anyone object to these curves being approved for IETF standard
> >>> body use/typos/general nastiness?
> >>
> >> No objection, but there's maybe some checking to be done before
> we're
> >> ready to push the button.
> >
> > Absolutely! Please double check I didn't make any typos, and if you
> > have MAGMA access, redo the verifications. This goes for everyone.
> The
> > more eyeballs on this, the less chance we make a bad mistake.
> > safecurves.cr.yp.to comes with a script to redo everything.
> >
> > Also, if anyone knows something that DJB and Tanja Lange do not,
> > please tell us!
> >
> >>
> >> One thing though is that rfc 3526 [1] is standards track so if
> >> there's a reason for that (and there may or may not
> >> be;-) then we might want these to be the same which'd mean not doing
> >> 'em in cfrg. That can be figured out later though.
> >
> > I have no opinions about how this gets to from draft to RFC.
> 
>   Which is good because the process from draft to RFC is already well-
> defined. It's on the IETF web site, check it out!
> 
> > I understand there are many channels, and someone will have to pick
> > one.
> 
>   And that someone would be you!
> 
>   While it's certainly useful to get these curves defined in an IETF
> document, getting them used by any protocol will require some more work
> from you. You should get OIDs defined for each of them if they don't
> exist already. You should write up separate drafts for inclusion of
> these curves into the protocols' various IANA-managed repositories--
> yes, sadly there are many. And for protocols which allow for in-line
> passing of complete domain parameter sets (like TLS) you'll need to
> modify the data structure used (doesn't look like these could be used
> with the "explicit_prime" ECCurveType, for instance).
> 
>   On the plus side, for the most part you can just follow the path
> blazed by the brainpool folks, just follow what they did.
You should also look at: RFC 6090
The math for Small Wierstrass curves is defined well - you need the equivalent of
6090 for Edwards curves.  Do note the authors of this excellent RFC
Include both chairs of this list.


> 
>   Welcome to the tedious world of sausage making, don't mind the blood
> on your hands, you get used to it.
> 
>   Dan.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list
> Cfrg@irtf.org
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg