Changing RFCXXXX string to OPAQUEv1- #420
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
chris-wood
reviewed
Sep 13, 2023
|
Yeah that might be nicer. I see that VOPRF does "OPRFv1-" as the context string -- perhaps we can just follow suit? |
Yep, that's my suggestion. |
kevinlewi
force-pushed
the
rfc_editor_note
branch
from
6500d3d to
34ff52a
Compare
|
Updated the string from "RFCXXXX" to "OPAQUEv1-". Also re-ran test vector generation |
kevinlewi
changed the title
chris-wood
approved these changes
Sep 25, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Based on Scott Fluhrer's mailing list comments:
"At one point, the draft uses “RFCXXXX” as a protocol identifier in the preamble; is that expected to be replaced by the assigned RFC number? If so, I would suggest you add instructions to the RFC editors to that effect."