Re: [openpgp] Followup on fingerprints

[ianG <[e-mail]>]

On 29/07/2015 16:06 pm, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:31, [e-mail] said:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Werner Koch <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>> OpenPGP does not specify a user interface but the wire format.
>>> Obviously we use the most compact format there which is the plain binary
>>> format.  The questions are
>>>
>>
>> That is how we used to work in the 1990s. Since then we have had to do
>> internationalization and such.
>
> I can't see what internationalization has to do with the binary
> representation of a fingerprint.  As I said RFC-4880 is about the wire
> format and not about user interfaces: It tells how to compute a
> fingerprint and that it is the 16 octet MD5 hash or the 20 octet SHA-1
> hash.  Now that a fingerprint is printed like this
>
> pub   dsa2048/F2AD85AC1E42B367 2007-12-31 [expires: 2018-12-31]
>        Key fingerprint = 8061 5870 F5BA D690 3336  86D0 F2AD 85AC 1E42 B367
>
> is the choice of the concrete implementation.  It is an interesting idea
> to have a common way of representing fingerprints to the user or in an
> URL but that is not in the scope of RFC-4800bis.


I thought we were agreed on all that and there was a separate draft that 
PHB had written that just covered fingerprints for the user?

Ie, we've cut this out of 4880(bis) because it has merit but it doesn't 
belong there.



iang (mystified, am I imagining this separate document?)