I also agree that a separate "Test Vectors" draft would be the right
place to put it. It could even be an informational draft instead of a
standards-track draft, but it could still be called something like:
draft-ietf-openpgp-test-vectors
Hal Finney
Are there any objections from the WG to doing this? As chair I think
it's a good idea and would welcome a test vectors draft.
I'd go so far as to say it should be an implementation hints draft. It
could include things like Elgamal signatures, as well, and other things
that doing belong in the standards RFCs.
Jon