From nobody Tue Feb 7 09:30:20 2023 Return-Path: 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 D21E7C1524A3 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 09:30:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.094 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.094 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L8xq7_kpdAUY for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 09:30:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::85]) (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 674F0C14CEE5 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 09:30:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PB9BC0cjyzCxX; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:30:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1675791011; bh=mMQB9xxP+8exdlzO9RYC/+SRw2MPibygb+NmaqJxQ3w=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=NyqjewqCxy8KP+1WpWz7FQvrXlDZ/K7IlKT+PVzq7iLAd1fWaTEsIzGeGOuoKX2yk 55agz5Cg/8F2UVWDw/WwPKlRrbIArJ5eSXa7mWf4pJrVDvVhd7foVeHjSOp7W0HurI Awyy4QIwdKvoahBrsLZx770UzrUx51wFq7uqo+BE= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bqz7DTmDvsLH; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:30:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:30:09 +0100 (CET) Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DCE9168F79B; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 12:30:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9E0368F79A; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 12:30:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 12:30:08 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Wouters To: Daniel Huigens cc: Daniel Kahn Gillmor , Stephen Farrell , Werner Koch , openpgp@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2521372d-6801-3f7a-9de1-7bb0e85e2f4b@nohats.ca> References: <877cwwnige.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [openpgp] Move new Signatures and Keys from v5 to v6? X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2023 17:30:18 -0000 On Tue, 7 Feb 2023, Daniel Huigens wrote: > Yeah. Just for the record, as you know ofc we also had a vote on this at > IETF 115, that went in favor of moving to v6; see the minutes at [1]: We had a "reading of the room", not a "vote" :) >> An MR for moving from v5 to v6 for Keys, Signatures, and OPS (but not >> PKESK or SKESK), and changing the prefix octet from 0x9a to 0x9b: >> [!231](https://gitlab.com/openpgp-wg/rfc4880bis/-/merge_requests/231) Looks good to me. Paul