> On Jan 22, 2025, at 5:10 PM, Madison Church <mchu...@staff.rfc-editor.org>
> wrote:
>
>>> 5) <!-- [rfced] We note that the following terms appear inconsistently
>>> throughout the document. If there are no objections, we will use the
>>> form on the right.
>>>
>>> PKCS #1 v1.5 vs. PKCS #1 v1.5 algorithm
>>> RSA-KEM vs. RSA-KEM algorithm vs. RSA-KEM Algorithm
>>> Key Derivation Function vs. key-derivation function vs. key derivation
>>> function (per RFC 9629)
>>> -->
>>
>> Please fix "key-derivation function" by dropping the hyphen.
>>
>> Please fix "RSA-KEM Algorithm" by making the A lower case.
>
> [rfced] In places where "RSA-KEM" appears on its own (6 instances), should
> the term be updated to "the RSE-KEM algorithm" for consistency? Or should
> these instances be left as is?
>
> Example (Section 2.3):
> The fact that the recipient will accept RSA-KEM
> with this public key is not indicated by the use of this object identifier.
>
> Also note that we will await further guidance re: the use of "PKCS #1 v1.5"
> vs. "PKCS #1 v1.5 algorithm".
That is what I am asking Sean to comment on.
Russ
--
auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org
To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
