1
$\begingroup$

The tag currently has 2 questions with 0 watchers. Do we really need this tag?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Note that tags are not just for adding them to a watchlist, they are also used to lookup e.g. questions linked to other questions. Just a note beside the actual argumentation for or against this particular tag; just because there are no watchers is not a reason by itself to do away with it, although it is certainly a good indicator. $\endgroup$ – Maarten - reinstate Monica Oct 1 at 22:17
3
$\begingroup$

No, we don't need the tag.

  • The and tags serve adequately.
  • We have very few questions that even involve Curve448/edwards448/X448 which is the only other subject of RFC 7748.
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Yes, we need the tag because is useful.

  • The RFC 7748 informational memo describes elliptic curves and Curve448 and the and X448 functions. Currently, Curve448 and the X448 function have no tags.

  • RFC 7748 also covers other subjects for these curves and functions such as side-channel considerations, test vectors, the procedures that were used in generating the curves, important references (normative and informative), and a critique of the security level of each curve.

  • Curve448 appears in three questions whose total number of views is over two thousand, and the X448 function appears in three separate questions whose total number of views is around nine hundred.

$\endgroup$
-3
$\begingroup$

We need a tag for rfc's. Convert this tag into a generic tag.

Fill in a reason, Community!

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ RFCs are too broad a topic to warrant a tag of their own. $\endgroup$ – Squeamish Ossifrage Oct 1 at 17:38

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .