Re: [Cfrg] Adoption of draft-agl-cfrgcurve-00 as a RG document

[Tony Arcieri <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> This message starts 2 weeks adoption call (ending on January 19th 2015) on:
>
> https://www.imperialviolet.org/cfrgcurve/cfrgcurve.xml
>
> as the starting point for the CFRG document which describes an algorithm
> for safe curve parameter generation for a particular security level and
> also recommends a specific curve (2^255-19) for the 128-bit security level.
>
> Please reply to this message or directly to CFRG chairs, stating whether
> you support (or not) adoption of this document. If you do not support
> adoption of this document, please state whether you support adoption of any
> alternative document or whether you want a particular change be made to the
> document before adoption.


My support of this document is contextual: at present it does not provide a
similar defense for Ed25519 (despite the rigid curve selection guidelines
dealing primarily in Edwards curves) as it does for Curve25519 (which is
Montgomery)

I hope the CFRG does not paint itself into a corner with this document, and
when the question of a signature system arises, I hope Ed25519 will not be
struck down due to an incompatibility with the outlined rigid curve
selection guidelines.

I'm not saying the CFRG should adopt Ed25519, but I would prefer the door
remained open for them to do so.

tl;dr: I would accept this draft so long as it's not a blocker for Ed25519

-- 
Tony Arcieri