We're in semi-violent agreement on protocol vs. protocol specification. > I would suggest using different terms as needed in different places, and > copying the terms from IPsec where relevant here.
The analogous IPsec term would be "protocol" for things like tcpcrypt and the TLS profile, with "protocol specification" as a natural term for a document. As the draft currently stands, the result would be "encryption protocol" and "encryption protocol specification" both of which could be prefixed by TCP for precision. If needed, the IKEv2 term "transform" could be used to refer to elements of a TCP encryption protocol. Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 2:21 PM > To: Black, David; tcpinc > Subject: Re: [tcpinc] What to use instead of "spec" > > > > On 7/5/2016 10:52 AM, Black, David wrote: > > Like Kyle, I'm also uncomfortable with the use of the word "spec." > > > > How about "mechanism" instead? That enables separation between > > - Encryption mechanism (what is done to produce the bits "on the wire") > > - Specification of an encryption mechanism or encryption mechanism > > spec[ification] (what's in the doc) > > > > The latter specifications are actually protocol specifications (e.g., they > > include > > key exchange in addition to encryption). > > FWIW,: > > 1) protocols are more than just what's "on the wire" > They are the sum of the state machine on each end, the interfaces to > layers above and below, and the messages (on the wire). > > 2) a specification is a *description* of a protocol, algorithm, or mechanism > It is distinct from the concept thereof and the implementations thereof. > We tend to refer directly to the protocol/algorithm/mechanism > (unless we're updating a spec thereof). > > 3) I agree the doc uses "spec" to mean too many things: > - TCP option variant > - security transform (from IPsec, i.e., algorithm) > - security association (from IPsec, i.e., transform and its > configuration parameters for a given TCP connection) > > I would suggest using different terms as needed in different places, and > copying the terms from IPsec where relevant here. > > Joe > > _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
