[noise] Potential cleanups for a rev35?

[Trevor Perrin]

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:42 PM Andris <4FWkKLqzVVJWx6E at protonmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't think we need a protocol change,
> > "transport" messages play a special role in completing the handshake.
>
> That certainly would be helpful. I would, however, caution against calling transport messages "tokenless messages", since it appears that many intuitively understand "tokenless messages" in the noise context to mean handshake messages without tokens. Since such messages can perform a useful role in some handshake patterns and the way they are handled does differ from transport messages in some crucial ways, I believe a less easily misunderstood terminology would prove more useful.

Yeah I agree we should find better terminology.  Not sure what it is yet.

I created a wiki page to track these discussions regarding revision 35:

https://github.com/noiseprotocol/noise_wiki/wiki/Unofficial-crypto-algorithms-list

I think this question about better terminology/handling for "special"
initial transport messages that complete the handshake is our main
open question.  Once we come up with a good idea for that, I'll start
on a rev35 draft.

Trevor