Re: [Cfrg] Point format endian

[Alyssa Rowan <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 24/01/2015 16:18, Salz, Rich wrote:

>> [DH] So a long-standing tradition of the on-the-wire format is
>> changed because of the way the first curve25519 library was
>> written? That's a weak justification.

So all the running code in every X25519 library out there (there are
several) should change its on-the-wire format because of the way some
other earlier wire protocols (with explicitly no relation to this one,
as Rich mentions) were written? ¬_¬

> [RS] The IETF should follow its tradition and drop its wire format
> tradition.

Agreed. To the extent it matters, there's no justification for
changing the X25519 wire format to big-endian at all; it'd just be
gratuitous incompatibility with existing libraries for no reason if we
did. I might not put it quite as sarcastically as djb, but I am not a
fan of that. Running code wins: and that's little-endian.

- -- 
/akr
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=4CH9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----