IETF Logo Mail Archive

[openpgp] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc [was: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc-08.txt]

"Neal H. Walfield" <neal@walfield.org> Fri, 25 April 2025 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <neal@walfield.org>
X-Original-To: openpgp@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: openpgp@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03F152137C62 for <openpgp@mail2.ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u90qXKg0dpSo for <openpgp@mail2.ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.dasr.de (mail.dasr.de [202.61.250.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DC1F2137C59 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pd9e79d06.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.231.157.6] helo=forster.huenfield.org) by mail.dasr.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <neal@walfield.org>) id 1u8LIC-006X0l-0Y; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 17:48:44 +0200
Received: from alice.huenfield.org ([192.168.20.191] helo=alice.walfield.org) by forster.huenfield.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <neal@walfield.org>) id 1u8LIB-00FtGK-2t; Fri, 25 Apr 2025 17:48:44 +0200
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 17:48:43 +0200
Message-ID: <87y0vomeck.wl-neal@walfield.org>
From: "Neal H. Walfield" <neal@walfield.org>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
In-Reply-To: <87wmblcr8i.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
References: <174470653269.1286532.14892820163225351018@dt-datatracker-64c5c9b5f9-hz6qg> <LSicuu3DyGQdz5FlANti-HGJ6GuAucc5BKufbsCa603EsSZ0q1XMXYvt_OubLd0UQkg0gh2F--9y9WpoqWfQu5XU-KEcJ15GG66cSFk9ByU=@wussler.it> <87wmblcr8i.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/28.2 (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"
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.20.191
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: neal@walfield.org
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 06 Jul 2022 17:57:39 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on forster.huenfield.org)
Message-ID-Hash: U7DX6N3XBBPQXIS5WVI2PBOVPB2SUUO7
X-Message-ID-Hash: U7DX6N3XBBPQXIS5WVI2PBOVPB2SUUO7
X-MailFrom: neal@walfield.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-openpgp.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [openpgp] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc [was: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc-08.txt]
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/cZBqDzNkQuPsqH_1wzgm8gV7IYs>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:openpgp-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:openpgp-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:openpgp-leave@ietf.org>

On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 18:41:01 +0200,
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> With these changes, Stephen and I are announcing Working Group Last Call
> on draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc.
> 
> We expect the WGLC to last four weeks, which means we will look for
> consensus (or the lack thereof) based on on-list discusson through
> Tuesday, 2025-05-13.
> 
> If you are implementing this draft, please report back here!
> 
> Even if you aren't implementing, if you have concerns or questions about
> it, please also speak up.

I've had another look at the draft and it looks good to me.

Thanks to everyone who has worked on this!

:) Neal

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status