On Oct 6, 2025, at 4:46 AM, Gilles VAN ASSCHE
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi John,
Thank you for spotting this!
Dear Alanna Paloma,
I think that John is right and that the intended meaning was indeed “OID” for
“object identifier”. Is it still possible to change this?
Sorry for missing it in my review.
Thanks & kind regards,
Gilles
From: John Mattsson <[email protected]>
Sent: dimanche 5 octobre 2025 13:12
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Gilles VAN ASSCHE <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9861
<draft-irtf-cfrg-kangarootwelve-17> for your review
Hi,
I stumbled upon this AUTH48 version while recommending WebCrypto to add
TurboSHAKE128, TurboSHAKE256, KT128 and KT256.
https://github.com/WICG/webcrypto-modern-algos/issues/31
21 February 2025: The Customization string MAY serve as domain separation. It
is typically a short string such as a name or an identifier (e.g. URI, ODI...).
September 2025: The Customization string MAY serve as domain separation. It
is typically a short string such as a name or an identifier (e.g., URI,
Original Dialog Identifier (ODI), etc.).
Original Dialog Identifier (ODI) is a very obscure term from RFC 5502. I am all
for IETF highlighting 3GPP technology, but wasn’t ODI just a spelling error
that should have been OID?
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5502.html
New: The Customization string MAY serve as domain separation. It is typically a
short string such as a name or an identifier (e.g., URI, Object Identifier
(OID), etc.).
Cheers,
John
On 2025-09-16, 03:17, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
wrote:
*****IMPORTANT*****
Updated 2025/09/15
RFC Author(s):
--------------
Instructions for Completing AUTH48
Your document has now entered AUTH48. Once it has been reviewed and
approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.
If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies
available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties
(e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing
your approval.
Planning your review ---------------------
Please review the following aspects of your document:
* RFC Editor questions
Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor
that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as
follows:
<!-- [rfced] ... -->
These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
* Changes submitted by coauthors Please ensure that you review any
changes submitted by your
coauthors. We assume that if you do not speak up that you
agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.
* Content Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot
change once the RFC is published. Please pay particular attention to:
- IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
- contact information
- references
* Copyright notices and legends
Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in
RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions (TLP –
https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
* Semantic markup
Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of
content are correctly tagged. For example, ensure that <sourcecode>
and <artwork> are set correctly. See details at
<https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>.
* Formatted output
Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the
formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is
reasonable. Please note that the TXT will have formatting
limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
Submitting changes
------------------
To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all
the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties
include:
* your coauthors
* [email protected] (the RPC team)
* other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,
IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the
responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
* [email protected], which is a new archival mailing list
to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion
list:
* More info:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc
* The archive itself:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/
* Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out
of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter).
If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you
have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,
[email protected] will be re-added to the CC list and
its addition will be noted at the top of the message.
You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
An update to the provided XML file
— OR —
An explicit list of changes in this format
Section # (or indicate Global)
OLD:
old text
NEW:
new text
You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit
list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem
beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text,
and technical changes. Information about stream managers can be found in
the FAQ. Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager.
Approving for publication
--------------------------
To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating
that you approve this RFC for publication. Please use ‘REPLY ALL’,
as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.
Files -----
The files are available here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861.xml
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861.pdf
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861.txt
Diff file of the text:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
Diff of the XML: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9861-xmldiff1.html
Tracking progress
-----------------
The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9861
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation,
RFC Editor
--------------------------------------
RFC9861 (draft-irtf-cfrg-kangarootwelve-17)
Title : KangarooTwelve and TurboSHAKE
Author(s) : B. Viguier, D. Wong, Ed., G. Assche, Ed., Q. Dang, Ed., J.
Daemen, Ed.
WG Chair(s) : Area Director(s) :
