Re: [CFRG] draft-fluhrer-lms-more-parm-sets-01

Scott:

Thanks.  I will let you know if my code encounters any problems.

I did notice that the comments in the test vectors use _SHAKE256_, but the body of the document uses _SHAKE_ for the typecode.  I prefer the shorter name.

Russ

> On Apr 12, 2021, at 2:37 PM, Scott Fluhrer (sfluhrer) <sfluhrer@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Ok, I just redid the test vectors (and checked them thoroughly this time); the new version of the draft was just posted.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CFRG <cfrg-bounces@irtf.org> On Behalf Of Scott Fluhrer (sfluhrer)
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 8:40 AM
> To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
> Cc: IRTF CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>
> Subject: Re: [CFRG] draft-fluhrer-lms-more-parm-sets-01
> 
> *BLEEP*
> 
> Yes, it should be 0xE000000X; I got the test vectors wrong.  The values were intended to be in the private use region of 8554; obviously, 0x0E00000X are not.
> 
> I'll need to update the draft with the fixed test vectors.  Sorry about that...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CFRG <cfrg-bounces@irtf.org> On Behalf Of Russ Housley
> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2021 12:28 PM
> To: Scott Fluhrer (sfluhrer) <sfluhrer@cisco.com>
> Cc: IRTF CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>
> Subject: Re: [CFRG] draft-fluhrer-lms-more-parm-sets-01
> 
> Scott:
> 
> I am trying to expand my implementation for the new parameter sets, but I have run into a problem with typecodes the test vectors.
> 
> Section 7 defines the experimental typecodes as: 0xE000000X
> 
> However, the test vectors use: 0e00000X.
> 
> Should the four-octet typecode begin with 0E or E0?
> 
> Russ
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CFRG mailing list
> CFRG@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CFRG mailing list
> CFRG@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg