Derek Atkins wrote:
Hal,
<chair hat>
hal(_at_)finney(_dot_)org ("Hal Finney") writes:
We might want to consider some "test vectors" in the RFC which work
through the process of verifying a signature. We'd show the key and
associated packets, and then show the exact sequence of bytes which
gets hashed. I think that would be a big help to implementors.
I agree that this would be a boon to implementors. Do you want to
volunteer to do this? :)
Unfortunately once we open the door to including such an example,
there are a lot of other things we might need to show. The public key
signature operations themselves, signatures on text and binary messages,
encryption and decryption, encrypt+sign, etc. We could almost use a
separate RFC just with examples as an aid to implementors.
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.
Sounds good to me.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/
"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff