# Re: Cohen's paper on byte order

**From:** Roger Schlafly (*rogersc@mindspring.com*)

**Date:** 04/08/03

**Next message:**tq: "Saddam Done In By Thuraya Satellite Phone Encryption Break?"**Previous message:**David Wagner: "Re: AES supports long keys"**In reply to:**Brian Gladman: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Next in thread:**Brian Gladman: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Reply:**Brian Gladman: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

From: "Roger Schlafly" <rogersc@mindspring.com> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 17:20:35 GMT

"Brian Gladman" <brg@gladman.plus.com> wrote

*> Now a question for everyone with an interest: does the following, added at
*

*> the end of section 3.1, encapsulate what is needed?
*

*> "Where these sequences are represented externally as enumerated arrays of
*

*> 8-bit unsigned integers (commonly referred to as octets, bytes or unsigned
*

*> characters), the integer with an array index n will be formed from bits
*

8*n

*> to 8*n+7 of the sequence in such a way that higher bit indexes are
*

*> associated with lower numeric significance."
*

I think it belongs in sec. 3.2, because that is where a "byte" is

defined. Sec. 3.2 says:

It is also convenient to denote byte values using hexadecimal notation

with each of two groups of four bits being denoted by a single character as

in Fig. 1.

I would replace that with

It is also convenient to identify byte values with integers from 0 to

255,

and use hexadecimal notation for those integers.

**Next message:**tq: "Saddam Done In By Thuraya Satellite Phone Encryption Break?"**Previous message:**David Wagner: "Re: AES supports long keys"**In reply to:**Brian Gladman: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Next in thread:**Brian Gladman: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Reply:**Brian Gladman: "Re: Cohen's paper on byte order"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]