On 16/04/2015 16:05 pm, Stephen Farrell wrote:
To the extent that this is not openpgp specific, we have an
occasionally active list (therightkey(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org) for topics
like that. So far though, I don't think anyone's gotten much
traction for anything on that, with the exception of CT that
turned into RFC6692 and now the trans WG. But if you want a
generic discussion of "whither now PKI" that is probably the
most appropriate IETF list. (Non-IETF lists might also be
appropriate too, depending on what you want.)
(Just on that point alone, I think the better approach is to just do it.
Build it, show it works, and then worry about dox later on. The
solution on the table will drive the standardisation process.)
If you want an openpgp-specific discussion, that it'd be this
list, even if it's not so likely that a new WG would work on
that, or at least anytime very soon. (That's based on the
responses we got for doing "option 2" etc.)
I'm not clear if you wanted an openpgp specific discussion
or not though.
Yes, I was specifically speaking to openpgp, and more specifically
speaking to the straw poll you raised a few weeks ago over whether to
investigate the 't' in the 4 variants.
(And the subject line combined with your
mail saying "I'm not saying I want to open up the debate"
also puzzled me mightily;-)
Indeed ;) The point is, I think a lot of people might have not realised
that there was a "higher force" pushing OpenPGP in the direction of not
building a PKI.
It will take time for people to think about that, so I don't expect any
change. But next time this opportunity arises, there is now more data
on the table. I suspect in slow time this debate will open up now.
iang
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp