[Bug 25839] Curve25519 Named Curve

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25839

--- Comment #22 from Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com> ---
(In reply to Harry Halpin from comment #21)
> I am not arguing that we should test every possible curve and algorithm, but
> when multiple develoipers with use-cases want something tested and don't
> believe it's not implemented, then it probably is worthwhile for the WG to
> test it even if it's not implemented. 
> 
> Who knows - if demand keeps increasing, maybe browsers will implement?

Harry,

Adding to the specification is *not* an act without costs. As you already note,
this minimally requires developing testing suites. It requires user agents to
integrate those. But it also requires normatively specifying something for
which no normative references exist.

At this point, I would strongly prefer to keep it as an open bug, a future work
item, for a separate specification, until we have a situation where user agents
are clamoring for it and there's something with at least a modicum of maturity
within the cryptographic community that we can actually reference for
implementors to implement.

Simply saying "Oh, there's this curve" - without any description of it's
requirements - is an untestable, unimplementable statement. Those do not belong
in documents that are at the point of WGLC, and especially not towards CR. We
shouldn't just be throwing everything in and seeing what sticks - that's not a
good spec for any constituency.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2014 19:29:45 UTC