Re: [Sam Hartman] Openpgp comments

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Tue, 19 September 2006 14:20 UTC

Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GPgSg-0000Nt-V9 for openpgp-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:20:34 -0400
Received: from balder-227.proper.com ([192.245.12.227]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GPgSf-0001Ex-AU for openpgp-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:20:34 -0400
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k8JDcV22065563; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 06:38:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id k8JDcVW3065561; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 06:38:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: balder-227.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [217.69.77.222]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k8JDcRnP065546 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 06:38:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wk@gnupg.org)
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1GPfw3-0003uM-Ps for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:46:51 +0200
Received: from wk by localhost with local (Exim 4.62 #1 (Debian)) id 1GPfj9-0002lA-5Q for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:33:31 +0200
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: OpenPGP <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>
Subject: Re: [Sam Hartman] Openpgp comments
References: <sjmd59txlnv.fsf@cliodev.pgp.com> <1CF1EBF5-1C5A-4ACE-A489-10ED8D9BD31C@callas.org> <20060919121914.GC30748@jabberwocky.com>
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
OpenPGP: id=5B0358A2; url=finger:wk@g10code.com
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:33:30 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20060919121914.GC30748@jabberwocky.com> (David Shaw's message of "Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:14 -0400")
Message-ID: <871wq89e1h.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 14:19, David Shaw said:

> It will take a very long time (at least a year, if not longer) before
> a MDC2 and MDC3 are widely supported, and until then we run the risk

Given all the communication problems we had in the past with other
cryptographers on the use of the MDC, it might indeed be easier to
just add an MDCv2 as a MAY or SHOULD.

Even if we would flag an MDCv2 as a SHOULD feature, we as implementors
may still decide not to use it for a good reason (e.g. performance).
However the IESG rules are satisfied ;-)

The more interesting question is what we are going to do about the
SHA-1 requirement for a fingerprint and things like designated
revokers - this is a more troublesome use of SHA-1. Oh, sorry, I was
just thinking loudly.


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner