Re: [CFRG] I-D Action: draft-irtf-cfrg-rsa-blind-signatures-02.txt

Ian Goldberg <iang@uwaterloo.ca> Mon, 02 August 2021 17:29 UTC

Return-Path: <iang@uwaterloo.ca>
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 0A4A73A111D for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Aug 2021 10:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=uwaterloo.ca
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 ZVS2ifDX4pOO for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Aug 2021 10:29:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orthrus.uwaterloo.ca (orthrus.uwaterloo.ca [129.97.128.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 561B13A1119 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 2 Aug 2021 10:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from email.paip.net (thump.cs.uwaterloo.ca [198.96.155.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by orthrus.uwaterloo.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 172HTDYQ001962 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Aug 2021 13:29:16 -0400
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 orthrus.uwaterloo.ca 172HTDYQ001962
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uwaterloo.ca; s=default; t=1627925356; bh=3r5mU4HXZQ5yeojBf4+EzhEbHP0wl+3UT1aREgilhjg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=o9LsgjG5Bufq3oYyKhCpxsVq22aZATj79LXamQq5N/4GMNJJaS6HfNkiqxWNMdYnE J1u0glSLQuWatDGYhrBFFo/woaU7ssByaMX+WfoWDe2sgE/zOpRvHLrLlIRkPwxzKZ T6NnRJMkTvQD6pxlG5pVEoZIiy2V9A7y3pfvozYQ=
Received: from yoink (brandeis.paip.net [66.38.236.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.paip.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B661F5FC0168; Mon, 2 Aug 2021 13:29:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from iang by yoink with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <iang@uwaterloo.ca>) id 1mAbkX-0006RY-0o; Mon, 02 Aug 2021 13:29:13 -0400
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 13:29:12 -0400
From: Ian Goldberg <iang@uwaterloo.ca>
To: cfrg@irtf.org
Message-ID: <20210802172912.GK6513@yoink.cs.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <162791899203.1107.7194332652638927873@ietfa.amsl.com> <0aab06f7-7beb-4ccc-ab8b-3a09d4d3c8fc@www.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0aab06f7-7beb-4ccc-ab8b-3a09d4d3c8fc@www.fastmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-UUID: cc09b4c3-6f76-4a34-a25d-2feaedeb0480
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/YFgduI5H3KIRy7HptneNM_-WJlQ>
Subject: Re: [CFRG] I-D Action: draft-irtf-cfrg-rsa-blind-signatures-02.txt
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2021 17:29:23 -0000

On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 08:48:49AM -0700, Christopher Wood wrote:
> As of now, there are no more outstanding issues against this draft. The editors think this version is feature complete and would welcome additional review. Please send any and all feedback either here on the list or as an issue:
> 
>    https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-blind-signatures/issues

In 8.6, should "Signers can enforce concurrent sessions" be "Signers can
enforce a limit on concurrent sessions"?