Re: [openpgp] Expiration impending: <draft-ietf-openpgp-rfc4880bis-01.tx

On 07/04/2017 06:01 AM, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> OpenPGP is still too good enough, there's
> lots of things there that you can nitpick but nothing really fatal, or even
> close to fatal. 
This sentiment seems similar to my own considerations with regards for
need to change. If we are to change, lets do it right, not just some
small nitpick, in particular with regards to removing some complexity
since it is breaking backwards compatibility anyways (I'd propose e.g
getting rid of trust signatures for V5). The most common complaint I'm
hearing about OpenPGP is that it is too complex, as such I'm beginning
to change my mind as to whether protocol agility is only a good thing,
maybe we should work more on getting to consensus and reduce
implementation complexity in order to make it possible for better
auditing of implementations etc.

-- 
----------------------------
Kristian Fiskerstrand
Blog: https://blog.sumptuouscapital.com
Twitter: @krifisk
----------------------------
Public OpenPGP keyblock at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
----------------------------
Nil satis nisi optimum
Nothing but the best is good enough

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp