I uploaded a draft for the IANA assignments for compressed code points for the NIST curves: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cem-compressed-curves/ In it, I elected to not pursue the format to encode the types of keys specified in draft-jivsov-ecc-compact <https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-jivsov-ecc-compact-05.html>, mostly because the support for 'regular' (SEC1) compressed curves is more widespread. However, I'm not against using the method described by Andrey if we want to shave off one more byte and require software updates to handle the different format required.
ekr, (seeking advice for next steps): do you think this would fit better as a footnote in the cTLS update presentation at ietf112 or do you think it would need extra discussion? -carl On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 3:00 PM Andrey Jivsov <cry...@brainhub.org> wrote: > I propose a method to compress NIST curves as defined in > https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-jivsov-ecc-compact-05.html > > Its main benefit is that the compressed point fits into field size / group > order size. There is no additional byte needed. > <snip> > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 9:48 AM Carl Mehner <c...@cem.me> wrote: > >> As requested during ekr's presentation >> <https://youtu.be/SfuvB41YhyU?t=980>, I will volunteer to write up a >> draft for defining new "supported groups" for compressed NIST curves. I >> didn't see/hear any objections during the tls-wg meeting, but thought >> I should probably confirm on the list before I got too far along in writing >> it... >> >> -carl >> > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
