[noise] Transport protocol spec finalizing

[Trevor Perrin]

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Alexey Ermishkin <scratch.net at gmail.com> wrote:
> Forget that, that was some crappy trademark DB. Back to NoiseLink )

Well, let's talk about it!

I agree trademark probably isn't an issue.

"NoiseSocket" has been announced in DEFCON agenda and Twitter, so it
would be a bit confusing to change, I think.

https://cryptovillage.org/dc25/schedule.html

I was coming around to "NoiseSocket".

We could justify the "socket" name since a socket is usually something
you plug stuff into (an IC, an electric plug), and in some sense
higher-level protocols still have to "plug in" the details of
negotiation_data, Noise pattern, and payloads.

Since I think you're the initial user and presenter of this you should
probably make the call, but I'm fine with NoiseSocket.


Trevor