IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: pgp signing in van

Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Mon, 09 September 2013 17:03 UTC

Return-Path: <cyrus@daboo.name>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 558CE11E8118 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 10:03:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5xBOx9WFMizk for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 10:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [173.13.55.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B582811E80D7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 10:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C2C4AF1473; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 13:02:53 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com
Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (daboo.name [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SKDPoBYM5IH8; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 13:02:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.45.162.46]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C6104AF1466; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 13:02:51 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 13:02:40 -0400
From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Subject: Re: pgp signing in van
Message-ID: <3FEF8F74963AF3D7771BE40C@caldav.corp.apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <522D0617.5030101@stpeter.im>
References: <m2zjrq22wp.wl%randy@psg.com> <2309.1378487864@sandelman.ca> <522A5A45.7020208@isi.edu> <CA2A6416-7168-480A-8CE1-FB1EB6290C77@nominum.com> <522A71A5.6030808@gmail.com> <6DE840CA-2F3D-4AE5-B86A-90B39E07A35F@nominum.com> <CAPv4CP_ySqyEa57jUocVxX6M6DYef=DDdoB+XwmDMt5F9eGn1A@mail.gmail.com> <18992.1378676025@sandelman.ca> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63077527BC7A@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <522CF86C.9040909@stpeter.im> <522D03C4.5060807@isdg.net> <522D0617.5030101@stpeter.im>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a3 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="==========4C08D92055977D170683=========="
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 17:03:09 -0000

Hi Peter,

--On September 8, 2013 at 5:19:51 PM -0600 Peter Saint-Andre 
<stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:

>> But until the MUAs across the board support it out of the box, I
>> believe most people don't know about it or know what it means.
>
> So that's an opportunity to educate people. For instance, perhaps the
> Internet Society might be interested in taking on that task.

Is there a reason you choose to use "inline" signing with PGP rather than 
multipart/signed? Is that a technical reason (e.g., poor interoperability)?

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email