On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 11:11:25AM +0200, Vincent Breitmoser wrote:
Hi,
(also picking this up from the expiry thread:)
It has been a while since this thread died down, and it looks like the
topic of the v5 fingerprint format turned out to be somewhat of a
blocker for 4880-bis as a whole.
Compared to many other changes, the overall deal of consensus vs.
necessity vs. usefulness vs. ecosystem complexity for this issue doesn't
seem that good.
However, we *do* have a bunch of things that we have easy consensus on
(many of which are in the first draft!), and that would be helpful to
have in the spec. It would be a shame if those things were blocked by
our inability to finish the fingerprint discussion.
So I'd like to put a new proposal on the table: we stick with the v4
fingerprint format, and focus on other topics.
Since I was one of the ones that proposed alternatives, let me say that
I'm happy with Werner's proposal as it stands. I did see one issue with
a "0x99" where it should have been "0x9a", but that's an editorial
issue.
My sense of the group is that we want to move away from SHA-1 where
possible, and I think Werner's proposal gets us to that point.
--
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp