> I verified that the example in Appendix A of RFC 8031 is incorrect as > reported, but I do not believe that updating the values as suggested > in this errata completely fixes the example. > > The corrected values given in the report are valid if they are > interpreted as little-endian encoded coordinates (i.e. apply > decodeUCoordinate from RFC 7448). However, RFC 8031 (and the reporter) > represented pub_i, pub_r and SHARED_SECRET as a byte-separated > strings, whereas earlier values in 8031 in this byte-separated format > (random_i, random_r, fixed_i, fixed_r) all appear to be in big endian > order and the d_i and d_r explicitly encoded in little-endian are > given as a single string.
I think it's the other way around. The byte-separated values are all in little-endian encoding and d_i and d_r are simply given as hex-encoded numbers (in their natural big-endian encoding as you'd write a decimal number). So I think the test vectors are correct. Regards, Tobias _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
