[noise] [NoiseSocket] First handshake message parsing questions

Alexey Ermishkin scratch.net at gmail.com
Mon Feb 27 20:27:20 PST 2017

Thanks, will add this to the spec.

One more question left :)

When we calculate the prologue, its first byte is the amount of sub-messages we have in the first message.
Maybe we should add this byte to the first message itself (right after length)?
Instead of crawling through the message till EOF we then could use the simple for-loop to iterate over N sub-messages 

-----Original Message-----
From: Trevor Perrin [mailto:trevp at trevp.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 9:15 AM
To: Alexey Ermishkin <scratch.net at gmail.com>
Cc: noise <noise at moderncrypto.org>
Subject: Re: [noise] [NoiseSocket] First handshake message parsing questions

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Alexey Ermishkin <scratch.net at gmail.com> wrote:
> Another question that I'd like to discuss once again is sub-messages naming.
> Do we really need to switch from Noise_XX_blablabla to 
> NoiseSocket_blablabla? The pattern logic is the same and we have our 
> mandatory prologue if we want to differ (why?) from other 
> implementations I really want to add IK support to the first version 
> and it will look ugly to use NoiseSocket for XX and Noise_IK for IK

I agree, use the standard names (Noise_XX_blabla).

I was suggesting NoiseSocket_blabla as a naming convention for referring to the whole protocol including the versioning/framing, not to change the Noise protocol name string.


More information about the Noise mailing list