[CFRG] Re: Where should test vectors live?

[Jean Mahoney <[e-mail]>]

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]>
>