Re: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization

Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com> Wed, 08 May 2013 00:37 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7705011E80D1 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 17:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.264
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.264 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.334, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2l40JYYARdvw for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 17:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2lp0206.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF95311E80A6 for <jose@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 May 2013 17:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BL2FFO11FD019.protection.gbl (10.173.161.201) by BL2FFO11HUB020.protection.gbl (10.173.160.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.687.1; Wed, 8 May 2013 00:37:13 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14HUBC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (131.107.125.37) by BL2FFO11FD019.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.173.161.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.687.1 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 8 May 2013 00:37:13 +0000
Received: from TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.161]) by TK5EX14HUBC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.7.153]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.003; Wed, 8 May 2013 00:36:56 +0000
From: Mike Jones <Michael.Jones@microsoft.com>
To: "Manger, James H" <James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Thread-Topic: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization
Thread-Index: AQHOSokGUnVw7/2APkGvFZmOHgLmz5j4soMAgAGN86CAACDRcIAAEZKQ
Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 00:36:55 +0000
Message-ID: <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394367712FDA@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <049.92c9829790c8d5776a0efee36c11df4c@trac.tools.ietf.org> <00a601ce4a88$dc8cdd70$95a69850$@augustcellars.com> <CAL02cgRNPVpiOrz+7SxNEcsNJAgCGg1dic2h+YX2FnVRZh_4wg@mail.gmail.com> <4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B16804296739436771242B@TK5EX14MBXC283.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1150D2FADD4@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
In-Reply-To: <255B9BB34FB7D647A506DC292726F6E1150D2FADD4@WSMSG3153V.srv.dir.telstra.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.32]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4E1F6AAD24975D4BA5B168042967394367712FDATK5EX14MBXC283r_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.37; CTRY:US; IPV:CAL; IPV:NLI; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(199002)(189002)(377454002)(46102001)(79102001)(16406001)(71186001)(51856001)(4396001)(20776003)(63696002)(49866001)(69226001)(47976001)(6806003)(47736001)(50986001)(74706001)(47446002)(44976003)(66066001)(512874002)(80022001)(74876001)(65816001)(15202345002)(55846006)(54316002)(81542001)(74502001)(53806001)(16236675002)(76482001)(74662001)(81342001)(33656001)(54356001)(31966008)(59766001)(56816002)(74366001)(56776001)(77982001); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BL2FFO11HUB020; H:TK5EX14HUBC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com; RD:InfoDomainNonexistent; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.onmicrosoft.com
X-Forefront-PRVS: 084080FC15
Cc: "draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption@tools.ietf.org>, jose issue tracker <trac+jose@trac.tools.ietf.org>, "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Javascript Object Signing and Encryption <jose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jose>
List-Post: <mailto:jose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 00:37:25 -0000

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4106 calls it “Initialization Vector (IV)” so I think the reasonable choices are either “initialization_vector” (the current name) or “iv” (the possible shortened name).  “Nonce” means very different things in other protocols, so I think we really should steer completely clear of it, to prevent confusion.

                                                            -- Mike

From: Manger, James H [mailto:James.H.Manger@team.telstra.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 5:34 PM
To: Mike Jones; Richard Barnes; Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption@tools.ietf.org; jose issue tracker; jose@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization

How about “nonce”, instead of “iv”?

“nonce” is used for the equivalent field in other RFCs about AEAD algorithms: RFC 5116 AEAD, RFC 5297 SIV, RFC 3610 CCM. Some of these use the name “IV” for different things than the AEAD nonce.
NIST 800-38D GCM does uses “IV”, though it is defined as “A nonce that is associated with an invocation of authenticated encryption on a particular plaintext and AAD”. RFC 5084 “CCM & GCM in CMS” even says:
  “To have a common set of terms for AES-CCM and AES-GCM, the AES-GCM IV is referred to as a nonce in the remainder of this document.”

--
James Manger

From: jose-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org> [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jones
Sent: Wednesday, 8 May 2013 7:41 AM
To: Richard Barnes; Jim Schaad
Cc: draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-jose-json-web-encryption@tools.ietf.org>; jose issue tracker; jose@ietf.org<mailto:jose@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [jose] #20: Shorter names for JSON serialization

What about “iv” and “tag”?  For the other names, I’d actually prefer staying with those that are full words rather than those that are abbreviations of words, since they’re more descriptive.  But I agree that “initialization_vector” and “authentication_tag” were overkill.

                                                            -- Mike