IETF OpenPGP (date)
June 30, 1998
- Re: undefined MAY algorithm example (Re: Question and note), dontspam-tzeruch, 19:57
- Re: undefined MAY algorithm example (Re: Question and note), Paul Lambert, 19:03
- Re: Undefined and underdefined algorithms, Uri Blumenthal, 18:07
- Re: Undefined and underdefined algorithms, dontspam-tzeruch, 16:48
- Re: Undefined and underdefined algorithms, Uri Blumenthal, 15:52
- Re: Undefined and underdefined algorithms, dontspam-tzeruch, 15:11
- Re: undefined MAY algorithm example (Re: Question and note), Uri Blumenthal, 14:24
- Re: Undefined and underdefined algorithms, Uri Blumenthal, 14:15
- Re: stream ciphers (Re: 128 bit block ciphers), Uri Blumenthal, 09:16
- Re: What is MAY NOT, Jon Callas, 09:03
- Undefined and underdefined algorithms, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 08:38
- Re: What is MAY NOT, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 08:31
- What is MAY NOT, Werner Koch, 06:27
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Werner Koch, 00:13
June 29, 1998
- Re: areas of spec incomplete? (Re: Question and note), dontspam-tzeruch, 20:24
- undefined MAY algorithm example (Re: Question and note), Adam Back, 19:18
- stream ciphers (Re: 128 bit block ciphers), Adam Back, 19:18
- Re: Question and note, Jon Callas, 18:45
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Uri Blumenthal, 18:26
- Re: Question and note, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 18:25
- Re: Question and note, Uri Blumenthal, 18:18
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, dontspam-tzeruch, 17:38
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, dontspam-tzeruch, 17:30
- areas of spec incomplete? (Re: Question and note), Adam Back, 17:27
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Jon Callas, 17:17
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Uri Blumenthal, 17:03
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, dontspam-tzeruch, 15:36
- Re: Question and note, Tim Hudson, 15:32
- Re: Question and note, dontspam-tzeruch, 15:23
- Re: Question and note, Jon Callas, 14:31
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Uri Blumenthal, 12:52
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, dontspam-tzeruch, 11:31
- MAY use X where X is variable or undefined..., dontspam-tzeruch, 11:11
- Re: Question and note, Uri Blumenthal, 10:18
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Uri Blumenthal, 09:22
- Re: Question and note, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 07:59
- Re: Secret Key Packet III, Christoph Moser, 06:46
- Secret Key Packets III, Christoph Moser, 06:32
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Werner Koch, 03:43
- Re: 128 bit block ciphers, Lutz Donnerhacke, 02:17
- Re: Question and note, dontspam-tzeruch, 02:09
- 128 bit block ciphers, Werner Koch, 01:43
June 25, 1998
- Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-openpgp-formats, Jon Callas, 18:06
- Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-openpgp-formats, Ryan Anderson, 16:11
- Re: Question and note, Jon Callas, 16:06
- Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-openpgp-formats, Adam Back, 15:50
- WG Last Call: draft-ietf-openpgp-formats, John W. Noerenberg, 14:16
June 15, 1998
- Re: Hash of Keys and Sync of Servers, Michael Baumer, 23:40
- Re: Another draft coming your way., Hal Finney, 17:06
- Relevant diffs between -04 and -05, Jon Callas, 16:15
- Another draft coming your way., Jon Callas, 15:43
- Re: Hash of Keys and Sync of Servers, William H. Geiger III, 08:41
- Re: Hash of Keys and Sync of Servers, Michael Baumer, 08:21
- Hash of Keys and Sync of Servers, William H. Geiger III, 07:43
June 04, 1998
- Minor updates to opgp & palmopgp, dontspam-tzeruch, 19:22
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Hal Finney, 12:08
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Philip Zimmermann, 11:30
- Re: More (some already reported) spec nits, dontspam-tzeruch, 10:47
- Re: More (some already reported) spec nits, Hal Finney, 08:57
- More (some already reported) spec nits, dontspam-tzeruch, 08:08
June 03, 1998
- Re: AGAIN: "Hash:" either SHOULD be used, or default to MD5, Jon Callas, 18:16
- AGAIN: "Hash:" either SHOULD be used, or default to MD5, dontspam-tzeruch, 16:12
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-openpgp-formats-04.txt, Internet-Drafts, 07:21
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Ulf Möller, 04:54
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Werner Koch, 00:40
June 02, 1998
- Re: PGP PKI? (Was: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP), Jon Callas, 19:20
- PGP PKI? (Was: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP), William H. Geiger III, 17:12
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, dontspam-tzeruch, 15:14
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 14:49
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Philip Zimmermann, 14:33
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, David Hayes, 10:28
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, dontspam-tzeruch, 10:24
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Paul Koning, 10:17
- Re: key revocation types (Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys), Jon Callas, 09:37
- Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), Jon Callas, 09:37
- Re: Proposed reason-for-revocation subpacket, Harald Tveit Alvestrand, 06:45
- Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), Adam Back, 03:53
- Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), Adam Back, 03:53
- key revocation types (Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys), Adam Back, 03:52
- Re: The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Werner Koch, 03:52
- The case against ElGamal signatures in PGP, Philip Zimmermann, 01:18
June 01, 1998
- Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), William H. Geiger III, 18:57
- Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), William H. Geiger III, 18:57
- PalmIII Progress: most things except compression work, dontspam-tzeruch, 17:28
- Re: implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), Jon Callas, 14:29
- Re: Proposed reason-for-revocation subpacket, Hal Finney, 14:13
- implicit IDEA with V3 keys (Re: Silence is Consent Dept.), Adam Back, 13:42
- Re: Proposed reason-for-revocation subpacket, dontspam-tzeruch, 12:49
- Re: Proposed reason-for-revocation subpacket, Jon Callas, 11:31
- Silence is Consent Dept., Jon Callas, 11:11
- Re: Version 4 keystructure, Jon Callas, 10:48