Ah, I suspected I was missing something. "|" here is used for alternation, not concatenation, I (now) gather. The existing text makes sense.
Probably no clarification is required for readers who are actually implementers. I suppose if someone wanted to add text then just a simple parenthetical " (here '|' is used for alternation, not concatenation)" would suffice. But I've no strong feelings. Thanks for the clue! On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 6:16 PM Benjamin Kaduk <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:50:20PM -0800, Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote: > > Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer-06: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > [[ questions ]] > > > > [ section 4.2 ] > > > > * I'm insufficiently versed in TLS and HKDF to know for sure, but the > text > > about "replace the string" and the diagrammed example don't seem to > agree, > > **to my untrained eye**. The example seems to show "imp binder" > perhaps > > concatenated with the "standard" sequence, rather than "imp binder" > > /replacing/ "ext binder". > > > > Am I way off base here? In other words, should > > > > "ext binder" | "res binder" | "imp binder" > > > > actually be (if I understand the use of the word "replace" correctly): > > > > "imp binder" | "res binder" > > > > ? > > I guess https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8446#section-7.1 does not cover > this > very well either, but the '|' notation is just shorthand for "there are > multiple outputs, produced by using the different values as this input > field". It's not concatenation, just a different output corresponding to > the different case of protocol operation. > > Suggestions for how to clarify that would, of course, be most welcome! > > Thanks, > > Ben >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
