Re: [openpgp] OpenPGP Web Key Directory I-D

Ian Jackson <> Fri, 09 November 2018 10:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 787E01277D2 for <>; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 02:50:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D1ORg4sBo-Dh for <>; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 02:50:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:ba8:1e3::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF00F130DD0 for <>; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 02:50:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by (Debian Exim 4.84_2 #1) with local (return-path id 1gL4Mw-0007sm-1y; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 10:50:30 +0000
From: Ian Jackson <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 10:50:29 +0000
To: Werner Koch <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.4.1 (i586-pc-linux-gnu)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] OpenPGP Web Key Directory I-D
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2018 10:50:35 -0000

Werner Koch writes ("Re: OpenPGP Web Key Directory I-D"):
> On Wed,  7 Nov 2018 20:49, said:
> > Suggested modification: Replace this part of the URL with the
> > URL-encoded email address.
> Nope: That breaks existing implementations and would not allow to serve
> the data from static files.

It certainly would allow serving the data from static files.  If you
wanted case-insensitivity and can't configure your webserver to smash
the case, then then in practice you could make three files.

Overall, I described this protocol to Simon Tatham (author of PuTTY)
in the pub last night and he spluttered into his cider and said "is it
April the 1st in a different timezone?"

> > III. Normative status of this document
> |   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
> |   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
> |   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
> |   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
> OTOH, it is a standard practise that RFCs are based on existing
> implementations and we have that implemented in in GnUPG 2.1.12 (May
> 2016) and thus for example also in Debian Stretch

I don't think most of the Debian folks realise they are participating
in a protocol design experiment.

Since you are still in the protocol design phase, you would no doubt
welcome implementation and deployment of an alternative simpler
protocol ?


Ian Jackson <>;   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address or, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.