Werner Koch <wk(_at_)gnupg(_dot_)org> writes:
Is your request to leave the timestamp out of a v5 fingerprint computation?
Either leave it out or, much better, use an explicit ID stored with the key
rather than one that's implicitly calculated from various bits and pieces
surrounding the key. That's how PKCS #15 and (ugh) PKCS #12 do it, it makes
key lookup much less of a pain and avoids the current lost-key problem where
you can't match up a key to a signature even though it's present and
available.
That is out of scope for the current work.
I can't see anything in the charter that would exclude it, it says the work
items "include, but are not limited to ...", and specifically allows for work
that won't unduly delay things and that has support from the WG.
Peter.
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp