Re: [openpgp] heads-up: re-chartering the OPENPGP WG

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> Fri, 06 November 2020 00:00 UTC

Return-Path: <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3AF3A08B8 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:00:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.306
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.306 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, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b=MKWEFRyQ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b=4BfeH60k
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id auu4dpms9QuP for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:00:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from che.mayfirst.org (unknown [162.247.75.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29AB33A08C0 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:00:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019; t=1604620800; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=w5WvrOR7b2uwkPtGqJ2REJ90FMUqqdrE9KOXEUaDtgc=; b=MKWEFRyQzZkHjmEBTCVm3bOscReP/4KDAFAJNeahP9oPdBJGuvQb/h/Y7yArxMt1OWbdt uAfeBy/TCL7aABBAw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019rsa; t=1604620800; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=w5WvrOR7b2uwkPtGqJ2REJ90FMUqqdrE9KOXEUaDtgc=; b=4BfeH60klLUHC73i6fuE96StAEcriN5DEvbQfDsfYkFdSPcGaGm+q/sawXi0jdMA5vFEe sjhtw11rm8XXTgZPMgyj+wxK7heDv/dweVsmXG/Bt9wC6FrAxjU6VmmePIg0O+2DQFm3h55 lRwNG9mSXGDtEsreXpEkQ24AHCy/b/oPbtOwhg+5O1ocSOaOMU2+a7/mQaLY/5yzsLdoD4L rRM9cyfQvhYBrh/UssHUbcWcGlspWZZJDRtGXZmvX4gJqw+fSg/we4xGW4SpZkuF7+ioQiH zWeZ9c1wgr/SJez3bRE0vW0wXjBJji9KpogDKc6hpzQ+0Ccr7DHh6L9lg5fg==
Received: from fifthhorseman.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:60d:f2de:f1ff:fec3:d109]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0463F9A5; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:59:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EF97420374; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:59:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Cc: "openpgp\@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <20201104202420.GT39170@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <20201020215929.GR39170@kduck.mit.edu> <260d532c97cfcf8285f68fa6080c809317646a76.camel@16bits.net> <73b6595fad9bd10d2772a5c6842adabc.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <0FC168CB-4394-4924-82B9-B40A15969FF0@ribose.com> <8e5fca53-4a3c-bb64-ef87-3a0f9d4bc11b@cs.tcd.ie> <c95cec411011a61ff99ea35d5eaa40b5.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <a97e03af-364b-d4ce-fab0-9b6fa184d1a0@cs.tcd.ie> <58d51c58b524765c9952a3502f70dbcb.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <20201104202420.GT39170@kduck.mit.edu>
Autocrypt: addr=dkg@fifthhorseman.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEXEK/AhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAr/gSROcn+6m8ijTN0DV9AahoHGafy52RRkhCZVwxhEe0K0Rh bmllbCBLYWhuIEdpbGxtb3IgPGRrZ0BmaWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldD6ImQQTFggAQQIbAQULCQgH AgYVCgkICwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAIZARYhBMS8Lds4zOlkhevpwvIGkReQOOXGBQJd5Hw3BQkFpJWB AAoJEPIGkReQOOXGDYEA/j0ERjPxDleKMZ2LDcWc/3o5cLFwAVzBKQHppu0Be5IWAP0aeTnyEqlp RTE7M8zugwkhYeUYfYu0BjecDUMnYz6iDLgzBF3kewUWCSsGAQQB2kcPAQEHQK1IuW0GZmcrs2mx CYMl8IHse0tMF8cP7eBNXevrlx2ZiPUEGBYIACYCGwIWIQTEvC3bOMzpZIXr6cLyBpEXkDjlxgUC XeR7TwUJAiGl/gCBdiAEGRYIAB0WIQQsv6x2UaqQJzY+dXHEDyVUMvKBDwUCXeR7BQAKCRDEDyVU MvKBD7KmAQCHs+7588C4jto6fMje0Nu97zzoppjJM7lrGF2rVnbHvwD+MgmGUbHzPSUrTWnZBQDi /QM595bxNrBA4N1CiXhs2AMJEPIGkReQOOXGpp0BAM7YeBnt/UNvxJAGm4DidSfHU7RDMWe6Tgux HrH21cDkAQC9leNFXJsQ7F2ZniRPHa8CkictcQEKPL8VCWpfe8LbArg4BF3ke5wSCisGAQQBl1UB BQEBB0Cf+EiAXtntQMf51xpqb6uZ5O0eCLAZtkg0SXHjA1JlEwMBCAeIfgQYFggAJhYhBMS8Lds4 zOlkhevpwvIGkReQOOXGBQJd5HucAhsMBQkCIaVkAAoJEPIGkReQOOXGdYcBANYnW7VyL2CncKH1 iO4Zr0IwfdIv6rai1PUHL98pVi3cAP9tMh85CKGDa0Xi/fptQH41meollLW5tLb/bEWMuUNuBQ==
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 18:59:46 -0500
Message-ID: <87blgbicct.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/GG0IkXcdI_o3K4vrPqRHVYRJqfo>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] heads-up: re-chartering the OPENPGP WG
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:00:06 -0000

On Wed 2020-11-04 12:24:20 -0800, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 08:36:25AM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> - Revise RFC4880.  The intent is to start from the current rfc4880bis draft.
>
> I'm happy to put that change in, as it reflects what I understand to be the
> universal or near-universal sentiment.

To be clear, i think the much of the work in the current rfc4880bis
draft does address the outstanding chartered items, has widespread
adoption and documented WG consensus, or is part of straightforward
editorial cleanup.  There are other parts of the current rfc4880bis that
do not address chartered items, are not widely deployed, or have not
gained consensus.

For the former set, we will absolutely start from the text in the
current rfc4880bis.  For the parts that are in the latter set, we should
reserve any already-documented codepoints in 4880bis, and encourage
advocates who care to advance individual drafts that flesh them out
further.  For what it's worth, this latter set includes things that i
have advocated for, so i'll be following this approach myself.

If the reformed WG can publish an actual rfc4880bis, as chartered and
with consensus and multiple implementations, then we should talk about
rechartering so we can adopt those individual drafts as WG items.

             --dkg