IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Diffs for next draft

David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com> Fri, 24 August 2001 04:53 UTC

Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA08984 for <openpgp-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:53:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) id f7O4i2m15476 for ietf-openpgp-bks; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from claude.kendall.akamai.com (walrus.ne.mediaone.net [65.96.217.45]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7O4i0D15458 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.kendall.akamai.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA26265 for ietf-openpgp@imc.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:43:24 -0400
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:43:24 -0400
From: David Shaw <dshaw@jabberwocky.com>
To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
Subject: Re: Diffs for next draft
Message-ID: <20010824004324.D642@akamai.com>
Mail-Followup-To: ietf-openpgp@imc.org
References: <p05100303b7aaf65aff68@[192.168.1.180]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <p05100303b7aaf65aff68@[192.168.1.180]>; from jon@callas.org on Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 11:42:53AM -0700
X-PGP-Key: 2048R/3CB3B415/4D 96 83 18 2B AF BE 45 D0 07 C4 07 51 37 B3 18
X-URL: http://www.jabberwocky.com/
X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is Waxing Crescent (31% of Full)
X-Pointless-Random-Number: 103
X-Silly-Header: It sure is.
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>

On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 11:42:53AM -0700, Jon Callas wrote:

> >I am a little bit curious, can you give a rational why the feature
> >flags are not bit encoded?
> >
> 
> No. A byte vector seemed like a reasonable thing. I suppose we can do a bit
> vector. Does anyone else have an opinion.

I think this would be better as a bit vector.  Most everything else
that is of this type of list-of-something data (key server prefs, key
flags) uses bits.  Also, many years down the road we could have a lot
of feature flags, and bits are neater.

Incidentally, in 2440bis-02, the key server subpacket is defined as "N
octets of flags" and the key flags subpacket is defined as "Octet
string".  These should probably be the same. :)

David

-- 
   David Shaw  |  dshaw@jabberwocky.com  |  WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
      We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email