ietf-openpgp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: I have a technical idea/change for the ECC draft

2008-04-15 14:24:28

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


On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:12 AM, David Crick wrote:
Note that 4880 *explicitly* says that you take the intersection of
Alice's and Bob's preferences and resolve them any way you see fit.  
It
is acceptable for an implementation to use 3DES only when nothing  
else
exists. It's acceptable for an implementation, thus, in Suite B, to
always be strict. (To do Suite B, you have to have AES as an option.)

yes, although there *is* a section in 4880 that says about
the preference listing being ordered.  The two things together
*aren't* incompatible; rather they say, together, that here's
some information you *could* use, but really it's up to you.

Exactly. The two things are there and it's by intent. You say what  
your preferences are in order, and I take them under advisement.





That's the way I'd do it. I'd do it in the code, not in the standard.

However, I realize that not everyone has my matters of taste, and so
therefore, I support the legislative solution.

I think the legislative solution should give clear enough
guidelines to the implementers about what they should
be doing!

I disagree only in that I'd change "should" to "must." :-) Should is  
opinion, must is fact. There's always someone who has to deviate from  
the best path for reasons we cannot fathom.

        Jon




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 2.6.3
Charset: US-ASCII

wj8DBQFIBReUsTedWZOD3gYRAjQOAJ4oqCm9dBGR1OX9NBoKJN+mtVc+xACgiluE
4Ixix7J9xvggxpejZix7Ar0=
=BDTI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----