Re: [openpgp] Requesting the editor to step down

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Mon, 20 April 2020 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <wk@gnupg.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 EB3313A0866 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:06:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gnupg.org
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 t5MySTwGvu9f for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [IPv6:2001:aa8:fff1:100::22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30743A087B for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnupg.org; s=20181017; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=BfBxwelOSklz5NWVgi0YD23FYLeFMTiyv+CTRo5t5LI=; b=gbwvqc34FgCOeQN0X2C7cTXHbT 8M/l5GjIzKf1z46xN0TbqOsweDOQiW5EMH8FebMU2iO+biHnJF7Zs49qlSHth0EHt7LvI2+YUxsbm /F86+a0mhNIFrGMVselPNvaDmKwewo+QNAmpAdNu1Cwq3o3M9X6gFN06+x5e1my/AkT0=;
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.89 #1 (Debian)) id 1jQSMX-0001q1-2f for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 11:05:09 +0200
Received: from wk by wheatstone.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.92 #5 (Debian)) id 1jQSIv-0005GC-5r; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 11:01:25 +0200
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: Ronald Tse <tse=40ribose.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "openpgp\@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>
References: <3J6ZOTPGPXG6Y.2JRNW7TO2C5HZ@my.amazin.horse> <B74328A2-2CC0-4D0A-8C07-E9D52DCC46B3@ribose.com>
Organisation: GnuPG e.V.
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
Mail-Followup-To: Ronald Tse <tse=40ribose.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "openpgp\@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 11:01:16 +0200
In-Reply-To: <B74328A2-2CC0-4D0A-8C07-E9D52DCC46B3@ribose.com> (Ronald Tse's message of "Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:35:48 +0000")
Message-ID: <871roi5y5f.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=smuggle_RL_AIMSX_number_key_TRD_Agfa_LUK_9/11_NIJ_Pipe_bomb_bank_SL-"; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/VVxFe0kbTCVxfI6LFybsU4PfKNc>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Requesting the editor to step down
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: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 09:06:27 -0000

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:35, Ronald Tse said:

> The said issues would be better resolved by finalizing the RFC 4880bis
> document and publishing it.

Except for some unimportant details we already had rough consensus on
the I-D a long time ago.  There are even at least 3 interoperable
implementations of the new features.

With the attacks on the keyserver in the last summer there was the idea
to add countermeasures to the I-D.  They are now specified (attestation
key signatures) and I am not aware of technical problems with that
proposal.  I do regularly publish revisions of the I-D to keep it from
expiring.  Since -09 these are in the queue:

722ed9e * Typo fix
30d8397 * Introduce the Key Block subpacket to align OpenPGP with CMS.
669f73f * Typo fix
6fd718d * Revert to the RFC4880 requirement of having a User ID.

Right, the Key Block subpacket[1] has not yet been discussed but I hope
this is non-controversial because it is another workaround for the
keyserver problems and allows for better decentralized use.  Experience
has show that this is very useful and should, similar to S/MIME, not be
done at the MIME level.

Open editorial tasks are:

 - Clarify how MPIs are used with 25519 and X448.
   (Gniibe proposed a change last fall)
 - Add X448
 - Fix some fallout with the recently done markup language change.
 - Final proof reading
 


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner


[1]
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Key Block

(1 octet with value 0, N octets of key data)

This subpacket MAY be used to convey key data along with a signature
of class 0x00, 0x01, or 0x02.  It MUST contain the key used to create
the signature; either as the primary key or as a subkey.  The key
SHOULD contain a primary or subkey capable of encryption and the
entire key must be a valid OpenPGP key including at least one User ID
packet and the corresponding self-signatures.

Implementations MUST ignore this subpacket if the first octet does not
have a value of zero or if the key data does not represent a valid
transferable public key.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.