Re: [openpgp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-02.txt (fwd)

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[e-mail]>]

Hi Neal--

Thanks for the nit-picks.  Two concerns:

On Fri 2021-02-26 12:50:17 +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> -- 20 octets representing a recipient encryption subkey or a master key fingerprint, identifying the key material that is needed for the decryption.
> -  For version 5 keys the 20 leftmost octets of the fingerprint are used.
> +- [ ] 20 octets representing a recipient encryption subkey or a primary key fingerprint identifying the key material that is needed for decryption
> +  (for version 5 keys the 20 leftmost octets of the fingerprint are used).

what does the [ ] you've inserted here mean?  It looks like a markdown
todo-list "checkbox", maybe it was inserted by mistake?

> -    09 k0 k1 ... k31 c0 c1 05 05 05 05 05
> +    09 k0 k1 ... k31 C0 C1 05 05 05 05 05
>  
> -The octets c0 and c1 above denote the checksum.
> +The octets C0 and C1 above denote the checksum.

This seems like a mistake.  C0 and C1 could be specific hexadecimal
octets (decimal 12), whereas "c0" and "c1" here are intended to be
placeholders for the checksum.  This is a bit confusing, maybe it would
be better to use s0 and s1 (s for "sum") so that it's clear that it
isn't hex?

At any rate, i think this was the only "capital hex" part of the diff,
so we probably don't need that mention in the commit message either,
right?

I've included this proposal (without the two changes above that i think
are mistaken) and your other remark about the big-endianness of the
two-octet scalar in a merge request:

   https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis/-/merge_requests/38

I encourage people to make merge requests directly in gitlab in addition
to posting patches to the mailing list, especially for
non-substantive/editorial changes like this.

        --dkg