IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-00.txt

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> Sat, 06 February 2021 17:08 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 743983A1308 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 09:08:39 -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=/RiL2u4H; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fifthhorseman.net header.b=bHLMkQcH
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 9ovq6mpefCUr for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 09:08:38 -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 F0CC73A1461 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 09:08:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019; t=1612631313; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=GwVefirC/x+G98v9P70PveeWcHolYE3Z4yGRvutEBl4=; b=/RiL2u4HJBtg0PiqtRoNthhnstJEc+1LGwYqOMNcCAqCQgWuy1RV3NH7EAPltZpI76GEQ dP6MeKjM1MmypaGBA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fifthhorseman.net; i=@fifthhorseman.net; q=dns/txt; s=2019rsa; t=1612631313; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : from; bh=GwVefirC/x+G98v9P70PveeWcHolYE3Z4yGRvutEBl4=; b=bHLMkQcHxFpnZGssV7Jrv1SjvYQ8m/fVs4oxurIETZH6QD7kTs6aW52+mmroL64CX9OiL JGmDmiZBRMV3zity/1wJhyAFrxfcSfYAPjqNd5D1tXA7yVOYTJ91rlQejpafBB0RJmqodo7 sUsNGESS0axoaC8Qfo5/gOHsl0AMlhD2WhfIq5BK9UE6Sm34CRdefrp45qKi1QZOAS6p1wL p0AeZzqnAbBx4SMBb54dVx0j90ogAUTZ1Pqo72M6r9wp+PnJFMgJTxYHA65vzloRukcQBHu HDGDFiDnDgZ6H+p3XdSrVPqvNUl6war98JrY8Hzq3/WBYtIxGtCdM0Lg7YSQ==
Received: from fifthhorseman.net (lair.fifthhorseman.net [108.58.6.98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C6D0F9A6; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 12:08:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E9064205A5; Sat, 6 Feb 2021 12:07:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, openpgp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <daab2679d46a829f5af1b77e211c7a5a.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org>
References: <161193808437.14457.1252111225434038573@ietfa.amsl.com> <629addad-3dc3-a490-46db-5fafab95c7d5@nohats.ca> <87o8h7cgrq.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <24870.1612559269@localhost> <daab2679d46a829f5af1b77e211c7a5a.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org>
Autocrypt: addr=dkg@fifthhorseman.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEX+i03xYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACA4xvL/xI5dHedcnkfViyq84doe8zFRid9jW7CC9XBiI0QQf FgoAgwWCX+i03wWJBZ+mAAMLCQcJEOCS6zpcoQ26RxQAAAAAAB4AIHNhbHRAbm90YXRpb25zLnNl cXVvaWEtcGdwLm9yZ/tr8E9NA10HvcAVlSxnox6z62KXCInWjZaiBIlgX6O5AxUKCAKbAQIeARYh BMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AADZHQD/Zx9nc3N2kj13AUsKMr/7zekBtgfSIGB3hRCU74Su G44A/34Yp6IAkndewLxb1WdRSokycnaCVyrk0nb4imeAYyoPtBc8ZGtnQGZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4u bmV0PojRBBMWCgCDBYJf6LTfBYkFn6YAAwsJBwkQ4JLrOlyhDbpHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3Rh dGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3JnL0Gwxvypz2tu1IPG+yu1zPjkiZwpscsitwrVvzN3bbADFQoI ApsBAh4BFiEEwp+KDAHzXjTYFqpc4JLrOlyhDboAAPkXAP0Z29z7jW+YzLzPTQML4EQLMbkHOfU4 +s+ki81Czt0WqgD/SJ8RyrqDCtEP8+E4ZSR01ysKqh+MUAsTaJlzZjehiQ24MwRf6LTfFgkrBgEE AdpHDwEBB0DkKHOW2kmqfAK461+acQ49gc2Z6VoXMChRqobGP0ubb4kBiAQYFgoBOgWCX+i03wWJ BZ+mAAkQ4JLrOlyhDbpHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3RhdGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3Jnfvo+ nHoxDwaLaJD8XZuXiaqBNZtIGXIypF1udBBRoc0CmwICHgG+oAQZFgoAbwWCX+i03wkQPp1xc3He VlxHFAAAAAAAHgAgc2FsdEBub3RhdGlvbnMuc2VxdW9pYS1wZ3Aub3JnaheiqE7Pfi3Atb3GGTw+ jFcBGOaobgzEJrhEuFpXREEWIQQttUkcnfDcj0MoY88+nXFzcd5WXAAAvrsBAIJ5sBg8Udocv25N stN/zWOiYpnjjvOjVMLH4fV3pWE1AP9T6hzHz7hRnAA8d01vqoxOlQ3O6cb/kFYAjqx3oMXSBhYh BMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AADX7gD/b83VObe14xrNP8xcltRrBZF5OE1rQSPkMNy+eWpk eCwA/1hxiS8ZxL5/elNjXiWuHXEvUGnRoVj745Vl48sZPVYMuDgEX+i03xIKKwYBBAGXVQEFAQEH QIGex1WZbH6xhUBve5mblScGYU+Y8QJOomXH+rr5tMsMAwEICYjJBBgWCgB7BYJf6LTfBYkFn6YA CRDgkus6XKENukcUAAAAAAAeACBzYWx0QG5vdGF0aW9ucy5zZXF1b2lhLXBncC5vcmcEAx9vTD3b J0SXkhvcRcCr6uIDJwic3KFKxkH1m4QW0QKbDAIeARYhBMKfigwB81402BaqXOCS6zpcoQ26AAAX mwD8CWmukxwskU82RZLMk5fm1wCgMB5z8dA50KLw3rgsCykBAKg1w/Y7XpBS3SlXEegIg1K1e6dR fRxL7Z37WZXoH8AH
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2021 12:07:52 -0500
Message-ID: <87zh0hnmzb.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/Qy_pEPaI_sVIQN9JiJv9eSadI44>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-00.txt
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: Sat, 06 Feb 2021 17:08:39 -0000

On Fri 2021-02-05 16:17:56 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote:
> The ToC doesn't include anything beyond x.y.z,

Does anyone have a strong preference about the level of depth of the
sub-sub-sections included in the ToC?  I think limiting to x.y.z is just
an artifact of the current toolchain we're using, though i can see how
comparing the ToC directly between this and RFC 4880 might be a
nice-to-have convenience.

I've asked Carsten on github if there's a way to adjust the depth of the
ToC from markdown:

   https://github.com/cabo/kramdown-rfc2629/issues/99

I don't think we should block on this, but if Carsten (or anyone else)
points to a straightforward way to change tocDepth to 4, i wouldn't
object to applying it to the crypto-refresh draft.

       --dkg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email