Re: [Cfrg] 25519 naming

David Leon Gil <coruus@gmail.com> Wed, 27 August 2014 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <coruus@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0169E1A06B2 for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:18:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 eWWETJcM21Ph for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com (mail-lb0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 764B61A06AA for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id l4so312356lbv.36 for <cfrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=tHtslcFNNPoR/DJNVK6Kua2vRgZ/9UB8wywjgCsP0To=; b=O2Ob9FO7uWL7zq47gHqNtmv8YH0Jzbeg8WsomveNRKF+aufcKzGWA0JyRfDv70CALn xqZdf0gYtw1wqKfkAdmN7tw7Nep9b9N7PNO2dArr8jzvNJvRrMb817e87oOLwJMICGHN FTz2Thd+s6X13V3nWe6TNvwrIfv5mc04YlwCOoghjjIy9pq30I7ls405QFLJ+SvyizAU TzlNG4QoFlp46cHHodbccN8uUo8xog2utbbGERg2//FI7Nn9OU/4QLCE2zBkruvnzrJ2 RaJDby6w7lB+UPZQ5nezCpjvQ0tBOZeKZ+K/Ib4/80tFMlo+goYfj2sGz9+QtFq1nH24 yzYQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.34.47 with SMTP id w15mr20352268lbi.84.1409145533613; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.154.9 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Aug 2014 06:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140825234305.7799.qmail@cr.yp.to>
References: <20140825234305.7799.qmail@cr.yp.to>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:18:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA7UWsUHLdXRg0-hpFZBAGUTrexU=CzOBcw+DqFey48MdCboLg@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Leon Gil <coruus@gmail.com>
To: "cfrg@irtf.org" <cfrg@irtf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93d94cef7cae105019c42ba
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/sAXU8Qck5v3Bf9jTHKLXarXcqxA
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] 25519 naming
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 13:18:57 -0000

Cryptographers have, for quite a while, abused notation and
identified different, isomorphic, elliptic forms. Well, abuse of notation
strikes back.

Part of the problem is that calling a transfer of co├Ârdinates to a
different form a 'co├Ârdinate transform' is confusing. (I suspect that most
people don't have sufficient topology to realize that different forms have
different topologies.)

Mathematicians have a perfectly good terminology already; why not simply
adopt that, and be explicit about the maps used to transfer between forms?


On Monday, August 25, 2014, D. J. Bernstein <djb@cr.yp.to>; wrote:
>
> All relevant coordinate systems already have standard names in the
> literature, and I would suggest sticking to those names whenever it's
> necessary to discuss the coordinate systems per se:
>