[noise] Protocol Names

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Alex <alex at centromere.net> wrote:
> How we deal with the test vector file format is still an unresolved
> challenge though. One solution would be to openly declare that the
> format is incapable of representing certain valid but uncommon
> patterns, such as those with multiple PSK tokens, possibly contained
> within the same message sequence. This would lead to a far simpler
> format at the cost of functionality. Do you think the trade-off is
> worth it?

I think it'd be entirely reasonable to define test vectors based on
the handshake name alone, as Trevor suggested earlier. Since this
parsing logic will already be part of most libraries, this will be
straight-forward to implement. It also makes test vectors unambiguous.