IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [openpgp] Wording/meaning (draft-06, 5.13.1)

Bruce Walzer <bwalzer@59.ca> Wed, 20 July 2022 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <bwalzer@59.ca>
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 59339C147921 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 12:53:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 8o6jsDi5jpdX for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 12:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.59.ca (mail.59.ca [205.200.229.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC2E7C147920 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 12:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.2] (helo=ohm.59.ca) by mail.59.ca with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <bwalzer@59.ca>) id 1oEFky-0008Do-7V; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:53:16 -0500
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:53:14 -0500
From: Bruce Walzer <bwalzer@59.ca>
To: Justus Winter <justus@sequoia-pgp.org>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YthdKvV4/q1G09XD@ohm.59.ca>
References: <YtMgfznF78Fb7KJC@ohm.59.ca> <874jzf4iz4.fsf@sequoia-pgp.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <874jzf4iz4.fsf@sequoia-pgp.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/vWRNN-yXr22shhHgf9usUmdOEnU>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Wording/meaning (draft-06, 5.13.1)
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 19:53:29 -0000

On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 09:50:07PM +0200, Justus Winter wrote:
> Bruce Walzer <bwalzer@59.ca> writes:
> 
> > At the end of section 5.13.1, at the end of the "NON-NORMATIVE
> > EXPLANATION" is the following text:
> >
> >>However, no update will be needed because the MDC has been replaced
> >>by the AEAD encryption described in this document.
[...]
> Previously, in RFC4880, the paragraph you quoted read:
> 
>       However, given the present state of hash function cryptanalysis
>       and cryptography, it may be desirable to upgrade the MDC system to
>       a new hash function.  See Section 13.11 in the "IANA
>       Considerations" for guidance.
> 
> Does that clear things up?  Maybe you can suggest some text to make this
> clearer?

If the text in question ("However, no update will be needed ...") is
referring to a paragraph that no longer exists in the current
revision, wouldn't it make the most sense to just delete it too?

Bruce

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email