ietf-openpgp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Camellia for OpenPGP

2007-04-23 16:07:01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


I agree that some level of consensus would be a good thing.  I don't
know if there's a current way to formalize this in the IETF.  In the
old days they allegedly required "three genetically separate
implementations".  I see your idea as being along this line.  Some
number of implementations GREATER THAN one.


If the working group thinks it is a good thing, very little is  
needed. You need an Internet Draft that says:

        You MAY implement Camillia. [ref]
        Cipher number is 11.

I picked 11 because it's the next number. And then a lot of  
boilerplate, and a little bit of kerfuffle. If the [ref] contains  
test vectors etc., then the kerfuffle is kept to a minimum.

To make that draft into a standards-track finished document, you need  
something like interop proof.

        Jon


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 2.6.1
Charset: US-ASCII

wj8DBQFGLTjvsTedWZOD3gYRAjBVAKDXVjzStdC309fUT9t7OiTRjCU/pgCfZFOi
QSiS4yrIjN27XpMKFrNshts=
=zbqZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>