- From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:51:03 -0400
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- Cc: GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com>, Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>, "hhalpin@w3.org" <hhalpin@w3.org>, "webcrypto@trevp.net" <webcrypto@trevp.net>, "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAL02cgRCW3ZBiU9vWt01pO3h0xiLCY2muLUBVmWJKVZ-ZMVDvw@mail.gmail.com>
I don't disagree with you on the merits. There is running code for Curve25519. In the spirit of limiting curve proliferation, though, I would prefer that we keep the focus on the CFRG-selected curves (assuming the process works). That could very well result in renewed focus on Curve25519 a little later. My main point is just that this is a really bad time to be deciding on which curves to support. There's already one such fight going on in CFRG. Let's let that play out before we make our decisions. --Richard On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> wrote: > Richard, > > It seems that, independent of CFRG/TLSes decision, Trevor's point about a > non-trivial amount of code using Curve25519 still stands. This is > fundamentally different than NUMS, on many layers. It seems useful to > expose, even if TLs (one particular WG) or CFRG (making recommendations for > new protocols/EC alternatives) goes elsewhere. > > But a +1 to the proposal. > On Aug 12, 2014 8:38 AM, "Richard Barnes" <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote: > >> -1 >> >> Strong -1. We should not be balloting on specific curves right now, >> either NUMS or Curve25519. We should agree on the principle that we will >> support the next generation curves that CFRG and TLS agree on, and work to >> support that once it's decided. >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 9:22 AM, GALINDO Virginie < >> Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> >>> >>> I would like to call for consensus on the way we will move forward with >>> the contribution provided by Trevor Perrin describing Curve25519 operation >>> [1]. We discussed several options and I would like to submit the following >>> resolution to your vote. >>> >>> >>> >>> *Proposed resolution : the WG agrees on the principle that Curve25519 >>> will be added to Web Crypto WG deliverables as an extension to the Web >>> Crypto API specification. An extension being here a separate specification >>> having its own Recommendation Track.* >>> >>> >>> >>> Deadline : votes have to be expressed expected until 26th of August >>> 23:59 UTC >>> >>> Guideline for voting : reply to all to this mail, indicating, +1 if you >>> agree with the resolution, -1 means if you object, 0 if you can live with >>> it. While silence means implicit endorsement of the resolution, explicit >>> expression of vote is encouraged, to help the chair measuring the >>> enthusiasm of the WG participants. >>> >>> >>> >>> Note the following additional information : >>> >>> - This extension will be used as a beta test for the >>> extensibility mechanism that we need to address as raised in bug 25618 >>> >>> - The proposed editor is Trevor, as long as Trevor agrees to >>> maintain the document >>> >>> - This resolution does not imply that the draft submitted by >>> Trevor is endorsed in its current state, as the WG did not have a chance to >>> discuss the content. The discussion about that content can be conducted >>> over the mailing list, or during a dedicated call, where we will invite >>> Trevor. >>> >>> >>> >>> Have a great week ! >>> >>> Virginie >>> >>> Chair of the Web Crypto WG >>> >>> >>> >>> [1] >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcrypto/2014Aug/0064.html >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees >>> and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or >>> disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited. >>> E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable >>> for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the >>> intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. >>> Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission >>> free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a >>> transmitted virus. >>> >> >>
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2014 15:51:36 UTC