IETF Logo Mail Archive

[openpgp] 4880bis status

"Neal H. Walfield" <neal@walfield.org> Wed, 27 March 2019 09:50 UTC

Return-Path: <neal@walfield.org>
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 B089D12028F for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 02:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 TGHVwVL2PWIk for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 02:50:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.dasr.de (mail.dasr.de [217.69.77.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DFED1202AE for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 02:50:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p57b22663.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.178.38.99] helo=grit.huenfield.org.walfield.org) by mail.dasr.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <neal@walfield.org>) id 1h95CS-0001sX-4h; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 09:50:24 +0000
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 10:50:23 +0100
Message-ID: <87pnqchcio.wl-neal@walfield.org>
From: "Neal H. Walfield" <neal@walfield.org>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>, openpgp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <87d0mdtj10.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
References: <CAKUk3bvBWoh9jz+T6t5yGs-P-P4cSg8AnSo_md3OFnzqVN-3=A@mail.gmail.com> <871s3475dy.fsf@europa.jade-hamburg.de> <96055353-B0EB-4E25-95CC-B25D9C5A0BA8@icloud.com> <2RAT852LYMAQD.3U70IQJPU0VPO@my.amazin.horse> <0092256D-94EB-4FE5-9560-FEB0B8E3769E@icloud.com> <20190323170723.GC1497@zeromail.org> <87imw9jl2t.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <20190324162058.GA1238@zeromail.org> <87o95yujj0.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <87imw5haya.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <87d0mdtj10.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/24.5 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/QXbRAp9U0P7TJlwR-cZ6FWUPegQ>
Subject: [openpgp] 4880bis status
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: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 09:50:29 -0000

Hi,

Werner wrote on gnupg-devel@gnupg.org that he views 4880bis as done,
and the recent proposals as "severe last minute changes".

Is there general consensus that 4880bis is done?

Is further discussion of the changes to 4880bis no longer desired?

Are new proposals no longer desired?

Thanks!

Neal

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 22:36:43 +0100,
Werner Koch wrote:
>  Those folks who are trying to get severe
> last minute changes into a revision of a standard may be better off to
> start their protocol from scratch.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email