Paul Wouters <paul(_at_)nohats(_dot_)ca> writes:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Ronald Tse wrote:
Since bis-02 now formally defines the AEAD packet and an AEAD
algorithm registry, I’d like to bring up the topic again of
adding OCB to the draft given its clear benefits. There have been
previous mentions of patent concerns, but OCB is freely
licensed for open source tools and has been included in libraries
like OpenSSL and Botan.
What is the advantage of adding more and more algorithms and variants?
Different requirements in different use-cases.
If OCB is clearly a winner over another algorithm candidate to be added,
is the inferior other candidate removed?
Not necessarily. Just because one is a "winner" does not necessarily
mean the other is "inferior". Again, different use-cases have different
requirements that could result in different preferred choices.
Adding algorithms is easy. Removing them is hard. That should raise the
bar for adding new ones.
Historically the OpenPGP group has been relatively inviting and open to
addition (non-mandatory) algorithms. I see no reason today that this
decades-old practice be changed.
Paul
-derek
--
Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
derek(_at_)ihtfp(_dot_)com www.ihtfp.com
Computer and Internet Security Consultant
_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list
openpgp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp