On 29/05/15 16:38, Derek Atkins wrote:
There is already an I-D on Ed25519. Because it has a different form
than the NIST curves it requires a different parameter. Is the
intention to include that by value in RFC4880bis? (I'm certainly not
opposed to the answer being "yes" -- I just want us to be clear that
we're going to do that too in addition to 6637).
I hope we hold off a wee bit there - CFRG are just now discussing
signature scheme issues and they might or might not land on
precisely Ed25519. But so long as we recognise there might be a
non-interoperable change then we're fine.
S.
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp