Retraction, apology

["Scott G. Kelly" <skelly@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Roy Pereira wrote:
> > The upper case portions of these messages must be specified. If you
> > don't specify what is in the message, how can you hope to interoperate
> > with others? These constitute significantly more known plaintext than is
> > an any of the other proposals. As I said to Tamir yesterday, this is not
> > a show stopper taken on it's own, but it certainly adds fuel to the
> > fire.
> 
> Pardon me?  Do you mean things like REQUEST and REPLY?  Those aren't
> TEXT, they are bytes. The only text would be the optional text
> messages.  What plain text?

I must apologize for my error, and admit that this changes the picture
regarding plaintext. Now I understand Tamir's earlier question as to
whether this is a red herring, and also Stephane's and your questions on
this topic. This significantly reduces the amount of transmitted
plaintext, and I agree that the remaining plaintext is not as much of an
issue. It still might be worthwhile to tokenize the transmitted text
messages, though.

Again, my apologies for this error on my part. I will modify the ula
draft accordingly if it goes forward in any form.

Scott