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

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Mon, 27 June 2022 07:06 UTC

Return-Path: <wk@gnupg.org>
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 A67A5C157B43 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 00:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gnupg.org
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 NsC_oatSOmh1 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 00:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [IPv6:2001:aa8:fff1:100::22]) (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 4183FC157B35 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 00:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnupg.org; s=20181017; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=AMAprJ1+VcW/IduoWMRWUlz95xs6Vve23qJjY+SiGYU=; b=Na3i8rEujQS1TiuRIYsOvTVASG BUXz79b3jBtYtfvCMQBnk64PsvWsxXo+BJ19u5S0epaJjoff8N8f+33FMW0Rg7Py03ObeN6ZvB2/d X6dgJVUC4BpX80v/TxVDvoRox3GA/zUyD4iYr4KH7j9+1S8OxVGFhGha5R8w5pHDoJrg=;
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.89 #1 (Debian)) id 1o5iox-0002bW-DM for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 09:06:07 +0200
Received: from wk by wheatstone.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.92 #5 (Debian)) id 1o5in8-000430-M4; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 09:04:14 +0200
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
References: <BB9D0AB9-CC8C-420E-8082-E9F64B09BF46@ribose.com> <7547a547-bb71-2bdd-f85e-91d46476bc6@nohats.ca> <54B2F360-C996-4A5D-BE3D-6EA405406C68@icloud.com> <YqPEw8OIlf0PG40T@camp.crustytoothpaste.net> <25c3a7b5-07ef-1521-1a14-43ef0c7b4043@cs.tcd.ie> <SY4PR01MB6251D365368552630ECCD720EEA99@SY4PR01MB6251.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com> <4dd0ad8b-9de7-15e6-a9ef-e0401acd69f8@sixdemonbag.org> <p_7pskU0MxbpIjGwmAUTMmFsJxjA8QRQCGDbCfrYQTSXocrlDUFDdNuHXChjBwy3RAc2eA_mRIyGFDWD6u5peNNL_F9I3yUYXAa5Khy5XqE=@protonmail.com> <87y1y0bj9r.fsf_-_@wheatstone.g10code.de> <mAnMlR7HNIXC0Mzquewg8bVEHE9cqSkScWwn7zNyD0GBWXzr6CFS858ENPS6fPzVV7TyIbkOhgiG75aVKSuw2EBeCc_SDYpaG5IIzmDGemQ=@protonmail.com> <87o7yuoluk.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <875yl2bajt.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <b98b3bb4-10a7-3c46-8c79-de2fa5a798fe@cs.tcd.ie>
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
Jabber-ID: wk@jabber.gnupg.org
Mail-Followup-To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, openpgp@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 09:04:14 +0200
In-Reply-To: <b98b3bb4-10a7-3c46-8c79-de2fa5a798fe@cs.tcd.ie> (Stephen Farrell's message of "Sun, 26 Jun 2022 20:59:58 +0100")
Message-ID: <87bkue37v5.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=CBM_Suicide_attack_Bomb_squad_CNCIS_Southwest_Transportation_Securit"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/yawYNf-a7yxGVI9LC6fsT9V2-1E>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] Choices for AEAD modes [was: AEAD and Rome]
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: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 07:06:16 -0000

On Sun, 26 Jun 2022 20:59, Stephen Farrell said:

> That was in relation to some already-deployed stuff. It is

Nope.

> entirely fine to note that things were already deployed but
> it's not fine to claim WG consensus for anything done since
> RFC4880 really - the previous incarnation of this WG didn't
> manage to reach consensus (which ought be a lesson for us

Nope.  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. 

I explained it more than once: we had a nearly finished version but then
new folks showed up and demanded minor and major changes.  All progress
stopped with that filibuster behaviour up until the WG was closed.
Second system effect at its best.


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner


-- 
The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that
refuse military service.             - A. Einstein