On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:06:17PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Benjamin Kaduk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It also seems that we might also be thinking that there might be other > >> ways to encode the keys (into bytes), but that mostly it is the case > >> that we have a single encoding that we stick to. > > > But for a protocol don't we kind of only want a single encoding anyway? > > As the thread between Neil and Ilari shows, there were reasons to make > different choices. > > My take, being intentionally not intimate with such issues, is that the best > encoding for using the key may not be the best encoding for transmitting the > key. That the translation between the two forms might sometimes fail, and
This sounds like you are in favor of allowing multiple "kty" values? > so it's a protocol decision as to which to transmit, which to sign (in a > certificate), etc. > (And that this was the entire lwig-curves document's point) FWIW, my understanding is that if the translation fails then the point/key is malformed anyway and should not be used. -Ben > >> (Why did we call it "EC2". Huh) > > > I feel like I used to know this, but am drawing a blank. Maybe that > > there are two coordinates included? > > I have always been blissfully ignorant. > > > > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > > _______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
