Return-Path: 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 3CC7AC15155C for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 03:46:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.106 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pureftpd.org; domainkeys=pass (2048-bit key) header.from=cfrg@pureftpd.org header.d=pureftpd.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CfFae1L_V_uO for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 03:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-uk.mx.c9x.org (mailout-uk.mx.c9x.org [137.74.223.233]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80786C151084 for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 03:46:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from msync.c9x.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by msync.c9x.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id a70bce1f for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 12:46:19 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pureftpd.org; h=from :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; s=selector1; bh=iazc w+XmYu+4doHtsDnGUMt8Mo0=; b=bGS0qGNGr1woj3ck4J3jRe/3Xy4V+EgE6oWW z5UqeBeeaegV/G3dxoesEfy8LF5rUb1Ve35yAvMeaO9rlCWZTpnFD2HVO+c0B+qC 5VqtLjpsAqZsp+jWcoTkMtD0BEag2890atzKq//7CiwvmwlubstQNjz9Il3Y6d6t SObHwlcGvqMnOj1aPdioof24qXHU5y5q4R1dJs+8hm6/C1vqM5tGBxJc2M4Et/78 xFQTNSTM6OgWaIIbarQmMovoBk2lNG8BG6fy0UupJpCd8ChHsHhG4IPy7GxkEUFn 1yZhNRJ+V/b5I+JbK2dc4WCtynQBQ9V3ZpjA60Ly2KEp1hyIAA== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pureftpd.org; h=from :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; q=dns; s=selector1; b= nBZZoPrQ8D1aG/ictAurdiFCf7ApHjppgZWqQtrtRxJ6ksivJyigEDCalLczLvVw 6QNvz1nzoOUhMUUkR0EMkLVfc7zIVVTr59jILFvF0SjTGm+KDnFEjRI8apAdtT0I 7DARKgray8FSM72qm8+cS4zIWb5RT/g15pyLosXTtw0t1QOEU2TOhC/+1a7T1rPp kHuj93QCG+EmqK9zk8KofwXdrC/4MbTJDK5zSOB/+xlMeQhZAp6A7McsaYAaO3us TE6UprFmSdpnWOKQLI4IuB6jltehY+LBsbfPT5M+EI1prphVzjPlZjTDhwj9/p1f mId4k0vuengkyZYuSuxPgQ== Received: from smtpclient.apple (nogent.c9x.org [82.66.97.28]) by premiere.mx.c9x.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 269446d1 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO) for ; Fri, 20 Sep 2024 12:46:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Frank Denis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3818.100.11.1.3\)) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 12:45:59 +0200 References: To: CFRG In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3818.100.11.1.3) Message-ID-Hash: 52YRFDSS6WKO2LEL2IQERXVBKHAP7HG7 X-Message-ID-Hash: 52YRFDSS6WKO2LEL2IQERXVBKHAP7HG7 X-MailFrom: cfrg@pureftpd.org X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-cfrg.irtf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4 Precedence: list Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BCFRG=5D_Re=3A_Where_should_test_vectors_live=3F?= List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Hi Ori, This is very good idea. And if files are hosted in Git, publishing the hash is not even = necessary, as the URI can directly represent a specific revision. -Frank. > On Sep 20, 2024, at 03:03, Orie Steele = wrote: >=20 > I would want to ensure that the references made in RFCs are not = changed after publication. >=20 > You could consider publishing the hash of the files along with the = references in an appendix. >=20 > Hosting the files in a version control system and referencing them = that way seems like the least effort.