On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 03:16:31PM -0500, Nick Mathewson wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Ian Goldberg <[email protected]> wrote: > [...] > > FYI: it's now been accepted to the Designs, Codes, and Cryptography > > jounral: > > > > http://www.springerlink.com/content/nl86n0u547873001/ > > > > (The above cacr link has also been updated to the latest version.) > > Congratulations, Ian! Any substantial changes since the CACR version?
No, just minor ones, and I don't think any involving the protocol itself, but just the text. > Have you been getting any feedback from other vectors? Any > interesting/useful comments from reviewers? > > Is it your sense that folks outside of PCs and this list are reviewing > your work here and giving it the kind of attention we'd want before > deploying it? And if not, is there anything we can do to help this > design get more attention? As far as I know, only the journal reviewers and this list (and we authors, of course) have looked at it. Not too surprising, of course, as Tor is probably the most obvious use case. - Ian _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
