[CFRG] Re: Where should test vectors live?

[Christopher Patton <[e-mail]>]

Jean,

Thanks for confirming!

Chris P.

On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 2:55 PM Jean Mahoney <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Colin,
>
> On 9/20/24 2:00 PM, Colin Perkins wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > For links from RFCs to GitHub, I’ve copied the RFC Editor to get a
> > definitive ruling. My feeling is that we wouldn’t want links to personal
> > GitHub pages, but it might make sense to link to GitHub repos owned by
> > the research group since they’re perhaps more likely to be long-term
> > stable. Presumably the github links would be informative rather than
> > normative?
>
> [JM] Yes, GitHub repos may be referenced informatively. Please see
> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#ref_repo>
>
> If you choose to include test vectors within a document, we recommend
> that they be labeled <sourcecode type="test-vectors"> (or if you are
> writing in kramdown-rfc: ~~~ test-vectors). This label can help a reader
> extract the content. More info on sourcecode types may be found here:
> <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=sourcecode-types>
>
> For an example of an RFC that includes test vectors in the document and
> also provides an informative GitHub reference, please see
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9605#appendix-C
>
> Best regards,
> RFC Editor/jm
>
> >
> > For the additional resources, look at
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-csr-attestation/
> > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-csr-attestation/> or
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-aegis-aead/
> > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-aegis-aead/> for
> > examples (in the Document section). The datatracker lets you, where I
> > think “you” is the relevant RG/WG chair, specify the following for each
> > draft: faq, github_org, github_repo, github_username, gitlab_repo,
> > gitlab_username, jabber_log, jabber_room, mailing_list,
> > mailing_list_archive, related_implementations, repo, slack, tracker,
> > webpage, wiki, yc_entry, yc_impact, zulip (each can occur multiple
> times).
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Colin
> >
> >
> >
> > On 20 Sep 2024, at 18:28, Christopher Patton wrote:
> >
> >     Colin,
> >
> >     What would be the contents of the "Additional resources" field?
> >     Would it just be a link to GitHub? Ideally the RFC itself would tell
> >     you where to get test vectors: do you think it's inappropriate for
> >     the RFC itself to link to GitHub?
> >
> >     Chris P.
> >
> >     On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 10:03 AM Colin Perkins <[e-mail]
> >     <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >
> >         Hi,
> >
> >         The datatracker has an “Additional resources” field for each
> >         draft, that can be used to cross-reference to GitHub repos, etc.
> >
> >         Colin
> >
> >
> >         On 20 Sep 2024, at 1:17, Christopher Patton wrote:
> >
> >             Hi CFRG,
> >
> >             It occurred to me today that our drafts often have
> >             human-friendly test vectors that look something like this:
> >             https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9180#appendix-A.1.1
> >             <
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9180#appendix-A.1.1>
> >
> >             These aren't super convenient for a machine. In theory you
> >             could write a script that downloads
> >             https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9180.txt
> >             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9180.txt> and write a
> >             parser to pull out the test vectors, but does anyone really
> >             do this? Luckily for RFC 9180 we have a JSON version to work
> >             with instead:
> >
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-hpke/refs/heads/master/test-vectors.json
> <
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-hpke/refs/heads/master/test-vectors.json
> >
> >
> >             How do folks feel about pointing to machine readable test
> >             vectors from an RFC in lieu of producing human-friendly, but
> >             machine-unfriendly in the appendix? Suppose for example an
> >             RFC had a pointer to a JSON blob somewhere on datatracker.
> >             Is this feasible/desirable?
> >
> >             Thanks,
> >             Chris P.
> >
> >             _______________________________________________
> >             CFRG mailing list -- [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >             To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> >             <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >
>