Re: [Crypto-panel] [Cfrg] Fwd: Rev RFC 7539?

Good afternoon, dear colleagues!

I've sent the review to the CFRG mailing list.

Best regards,
Stanislav

2017-01-19 13:41 GMT+03:00 Paterson, Kenny <Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk>:

> Russ,
>
> Thanks for the speedy feedback.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Kenny
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 18 Jan 2017, at 19:41, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> >
> > I just sent the review.
> >
> >
> >> On Jan 18, 2017, at 9:45 AM, Paterson, Kenny <Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Russ,
> >>
> >> Thanks for offering. Stanislav also volunteered, but I think having two
> >> independent reviews will do no harm at all here, since the intention is
> to
> >> catch as many things as possible. So please go ahead in your suggested
> >> timeframe.
> >>
> >> We didn't quite settle on a mechanism for handling these reviews yet,
> but
> >> in this case I'd suggest e-mailing your comments to CFRG in the
> >> appropriate thread once they are ready.
> >>
> >> Thanks again,
> >>
> >> Kenny
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 17/01/2017 15:53, "Russ Housley" <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I can do it late this week or early next week.
> >>>
> >>> Russ
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 17, 2017, at 6:16 AM, Paterson, Kenny <
> Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dear CFRG Review Panel members,
> >>>>
> >>>> Please could we have a volunteer to review this document from Yoav
> Nir?
> >>>>
> >>>> The document is a proposed revision to RFC 7539 ("ChaCha20 and
> Poly1305
> >>>> for IETF Protocols") to address a number of errata that were found in
> >>>> the
> >>>> original RFC in a systematic way.
> >>>>
> >>>> The purpose of the review would be to check that the corrections make
> >>>> sense and to try to identify any further glitches that remain.
> >>>> Additional
> >>>> remarks would be welcome of course.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you volunteer, it would be helpful to also indicate a time-scale
> for
> >>>> delivering your review.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Kenny
> >>>>
> >>>> On 12/01/2017 06:24, "Cfrg on behalf of Yoav Nir" <
> cfrg-bounces@irtf.org
> >>>> on behalf of ynir.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Reminder.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there interest in pushing this forward?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yoav
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Begin forwarded message:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Rev RFC 7539?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Date: 16 November 2016 at 9:09:11 GMT+2
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cc: IRTF CFRG <cfrg@irtf.org>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cycles found.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Attached please find two files:
> >>>>> 1. rfc7539_long.txt is RFC 7539 with page breaks and page numbers
> >>>>> removed.
> >>>>> 2. draft-nir-cfrg-rfc7539bis-00.raw.txt
> >>>>> is the unpaginated form of the new draft.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Couldn’t do much about the boilerplate, but this makes it easy to
> >>>>> compare.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yoav
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 10:06, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 - if you got the cycles.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> spt
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 14, 2016, at 15:55, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This seems like a good plan.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Ekr
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi
> >>>>>
> >>>>> RFC 7539 (“ChaCha20 and Poly1305 for IETF Protocols”)[1] is now
> >>>>> implemented in many places and referenced by 3 RFCs and 8 Internet
> >>>>> Drafts
> >>>>> ([2])
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However, the quality of the document is not where we’d like it to be.
> >>>>> There have been 7 errata filed against it. Most of it is editorial or
> >>>>> insignificant, but still no errata is better than some errata.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So what do the participants and chairs think about spinning up a
> >>>>> quick[4]
> >>>>> rfc7539bis that has the same text, except that the errata will be
> >>>>> merged
> >>>>> in?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think such a document should be fairly easy and quick.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yoav
> >>>>>
> >>>>> P.S: and yes, of course I’m volunteering to write it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7539
> >>>>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7539/referencedby/
> >>>>> [3] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7539
> >>>>> [4] My spell check actually corrected “quick” to “quic”. The contents
> >>>>> of
> >>>>> my mails are veering far away from regular English.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Cfrg mailing list
> >>>>> Cfrg@irtf.org
> >>>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Cfrg mailing list
> >>>>> Cfrg@irtf.org
> >>>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> <draft-nir-cfrg-rfc7539bis-00.raw.txt><rfc7539_long.txt>____
> _____________
> >>>> ______________________________
> >>>> Crypto-panel mailing list
> >>>> Crypto-panel@irtf.org
> >>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/crypto-panel
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Crypto-panel mailing list
> >> Crypto-panel@irtf.org
> >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/crypto-panel
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crypto-panel mailing list
> Crypto-panel@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/crypto-panel
>