Re: [openpgp] Choices for AEAD modes [was: AEAD and Rome]

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hi Werner,

On 27/06/2022 08:04, Werner Koch wrote:
>   Please check the archives: for each iteration comments were
> collected and features adjusted until everone agreed that this is fine.
> I call this rough consensus.  This was actually done in a very
> transparent manner.

The point is that the IETF defines ways in which consensus is
judged - by WG chairs in the first instance and by ADs and
the IESG after an IETF last call. Editors and WG participants
are not in a position to call consensus or the lack of such,
*in the IETF process*, which is what counts at this point as
we're trying to find consensus in the WG so we can produce a
new RFC for OpenPGP.

So while you may think and assert that a consensus existed,
even if you're correct, that's not really relevant to what
we're trying to get done now. Arguing that it is, just
muddies the waters a little bit for those less familiar with
IETF process. (And has the potential to irritate those who
care lots about IETF processes and who may well question the
output of the WG should that output be perceived to not have
properly called consensus from the WG chairs - and yes, some
people do care about such stuff, even if it's a small risk
for this iteration of the WG;-)

IOW, there's a reason to stick with the IETF process and to
not give any appearance of there having been any end-run
around that process.

Cheers,
S.