Re: [openpgp] Summary of WG status

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <> Fri, 18 August 2017 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90341321C1 for <>; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 11:32:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h4_e64DyM6Oj for <>; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 11:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45070132198 for <>; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 11:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D6B7F99B; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 14:32:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EF77B2269F; Fri, 18 Aug 2017 14:32:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <>
To: "Salz\, Rich" <>, "Robert J. Hansen" <>, Stephen Paul Weber <>, "openpgp\" <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <20170815131326.wa5guttvgsp2la5g@calamity> <> <> <>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 14:31:59 -0400
Message-ID: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Summary of WG status
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 18:32:34 -0000

hi there--

On Tue 2017-08-15 18:35:06 +0000, Salz, Rich wrote:
> The last we heard from the co-chairs and AD was that this group was
> going to be shut down.

Erstwhile co-chair here.  The OpenPGP WG is being closed due to lack of
progress in the intended charter, sadly.  It's hard to argue with the
facts there; I think we haven't had enough actual implementers to test
each others' code and make progress toward something interoperable that
everyone can live with (i think we might have more opinions than we have
implementers, which makes for more talk than progress, and we haven't
even had all that much talk).

However, my understanding is that the mailing list will not be shut
down, so discussion is still possible (as it was between the last
incarnation of the WG and this one), and if work resumes in a plausible
way, we can ask to spin the charter back up.

I strongly encourage everyone to continue with discussion and
implementation.  OpenPGP is in use today on the global network, and it
needs the crypto refresh that the WG was chartered to do, even if we're
late in getting there.

I understand that Werner is interested in continuing work on the draft.
I do not know whether he will be able to submit further drafts as
draft-ietf-openpgp-4880bis, but the title of the draft one way or the
other shouldn't affect our ability to read, implement, comment on, and
improve it.

If we can get a rough consensus and running, interoperable code on a
concrete proposal, I'm happy to try to turn the gears of the IETF
machinery again to get the formal status back.