[noise] Document structure (was: Mechanical definition of "fallback" modifier)

[Trevor Perrin]

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 1:56 AM, Rhys Weatherley
<rhys.weatherley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Should the definition of the "fallback" modifier go into rev33 or into an
> extension document?  Perhaps Noise Pipes can be spun off completely into an
> extension now?  An important extension to be sure, but maybe no longer
> necessary in the core.


Not sure.  I talked about that with Jason before revision 32 and he
convinced me this is complicated and needs more discussion:

 * Should we have separate documents that are related somehow (eg
"core" and "extensions")?  Or have separate "chapters" (or "books" or
"layers") within a single document?  Or just keep adding sections to
the current doc?

 * If we're going to divide things into separate documents (or
"chapters", or "layers"), what is the division based on?  Old vs new?
More-important vs less-important?  Modifiers vs non-modifiers?

 * Are these decisions we're able to make now?  Do we need to make them now?

It would be great to hear thoughts about how these decisions would
affect people, e.g. would having separate documents make things easier
for library developers to focus on features they care about, or create
confusion and fragmentation?


To plan for the future, here are things we might add in the next months or year:

 - More fallback/zero-RTT modes (resumption PSKs, 0-RTT With semi-ephemerals)
 - Hybrid forward-secrecy plus post-quantum algorithms
 - Signatures
 - PAKE (password-authenticated key exchange)
 - more pattern modifiers
 - Other curves, ciphers, hashes


Trevor