Re: [Openpgp-dt] a bit of a pause in progress

Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com> Tue, 20 September 2022 20:14 UTC

Return-Path: <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
X-Original-To: openpgp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5ACC14CE38 for <openpgp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 13:14:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v0bduz8ULIcC for <openpgp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 13:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-4322.protonmail.ch (mail-4322.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.22]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C32EC14CF15 for <openpgp-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 13:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 20:14:05 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1663704850; x=1663964050; bh=eouAZv0wJqzSA00yDmpUt1cyC4rBhXpE3+39l/jWNm0=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID; b=bE6raJQxsydsPdd06IspvY6mheLr971hq2AiKdVN3vcsghSDBdEV4XpnXa171QTcr c7iGLUWMOE3k0Uc5OjZbfuj+tAp+g76u1HBlkalr0cojUXD6iQPGdQ41VtSXTKNd8S kLSMXZ4vKiDMCZ6KQQ+ghaD1AKss/5/ckCMX+Qr1980DF9ejlWuwGgCc3olgJ0F72S iWmkJW4I8VSUhtA1Ds2g26nTsQ6GtrBB/le1oSlD7V/kAI+/A9Q314GXd4Y/JYsoXk GmV96um/KK7aNJNmIg6PmNzBacmyVDn0iDD0kWo0b4azPiCdQYfkRcYkXLju9+nZds i6T4g8+otG5mQ==
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Daniel Huigens <d.huigens@protonmail.com>
Cc: openpgp-dt@ietf.org
Message-ID: <i2LvkgkJjA_Xk-SskKrym2viigCnT_vF_XslHOwjVg_k1Q1QTrGLyO1AyF8b889TmIGOEf4Gfmz_TwVxsNyIN0L7qsobG5EuNLjpDDrSzXc=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <852ef22b-704a-ee2a-a812-9306e54dcf20@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <852ef22b-704a-ee2a-a812-9306e54dcf20@cs.tcd.ie>
Feedback-ID: 2934448:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp-dt/5Xo8WD_RlEqqLnJS3optej_ajp8>
Subject: Re: [Openpgp-dt] a bit of a pause in progress
X-BeenThere: openpgp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: OpenPGP working group design team <openpgp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp-dt>, <mailto:openpgp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp-dt>, <mailto:openpgp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 20:14:19 -0000

Hi Stephen,

Thanks for the update, and good luck with resolving this!

Personally, I think the WG has partially already told us what to do.
To pick a concrete example, the poll for binding keys to AEAD modes
at IETF 114 was 17 to 0 in favor. The crypto refresh draft does so,
and this draft doesn't. So on that point, we should go with what the
crypto refresh says. Similarly for the other points on which we had
polls. But yeah, it may be worth having some high level discussion
about what to do with the two drafts. But for me it's fairly clear
which one matches the WG consensus more closely (unless the IETF 114
polls didn't reflect the WG consensus somehow).

Best,
Daniel


------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, September 20th, 2022 at 11:07, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> Hi DT folks,
> 
> First, I want to apologise for being awol for the last
> couple of weeks - I was busy with other stuff is my
> lame excuse;-)
> 
> Second, I've recently become aware that a new draft has
> been published [1] that might be confusing (I'm confused
> by it anyway;-) so we'd like to ask that you give dkg
> and I (as chairs) a few days to try setup a call with
> Werner so we can understand how to present this to the
> WG list for discussion there. (I've mailed Werner so
> hope to have that call in the next day or two.) If we
> don't manage to have that call this week, we plan to
> take this to the list on Monday anyway (to ask how the
> WG would like to proceed).
> 
> In the meantime, it's probably best we sit on our
> hands with the crypto-refresh draft until the WG have
> had a chance to discuss. Optimistically, I'd hope the
> WG will tell us what to do after a few days discussion,
> but I guess we'll see.
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> PS: In case it's not obvious, dkg wasn't an active co-author
> for [1], I guess Werner was just preserving existing author
> names.
> 
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-koch-openpgp-2015-rfc4880bis/
> --
> Openpgp-dt mailing list
> Openpgp-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp-dt