ietf-openpgp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: meeting in San Francisco?

2003-03-05 19:07:29

On 3/5/03 4:29 PM, "Rodney Thayer" <rodney(_at_)tillerman(_dot_)to> wrote:

- draft 07bis or 08 or whatever it's at (Jon?  does this make sense?)


Bis-07 was sent to the editor last weekend.

- the key server protocol activity that the keyserver-folks and Peter Gutmann
have been discussing.  I think I'm in the midst of volunteering to do a short
presentation on that, so I would like to ask for a 15 minute slot

- ben laurie's perfect forward secrecy draft.  which he kept trying to bring
up as a discussion topic.  I'm not claiming it's perfect or anything but I
think
we should at least discuss it.  I'm sure we can rope someone into doing
a short presentation on this.

- deprecating pgp 2 keys.  I don't happen to like the idea myself, but lots of
people (Len?) have strong opinions about this and therefore I think the WG
should
discuss it, at least a little bit, at least to form a "wg opinion".

IETF discussions are open to anyone who wants to discuss them, really.

All three of those things are reasonable to discuss, and so the relevant
persons should discuss them.

Lots of people say to me "The WG should discuss X." My standard response is,
"What a good idea, bring it up." Very few people do that. It is my opinion
that someone who is unwilling to commit to a few email messages doesn't
*really* want to discuss it, they want to complain about how the WG doesn't
want to do their cool thing. That's fine, too. I sometimes like to go off on
how if I were King, the world would be so much better, too.

There's nothing that stops Ben's PFS draft from becoming an informational
RFC. There's little that stops that from becoming standards track -- this
group merely has to agree that it's in our domain. Obviously, it'd be
optional, but.

The easiest of all (assuming that there's WG agreement) is deprecating old
keys. Get rough consensus, and it's about a half-hour work from me.

    Jon