Re: [openpgp] [RFC4880bis PATCH] WIP: bind wire format representations t

Daniel Huigens 
<d.huigens=40protonmail(_dot_)com(_at_)dmarc(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org> wrote:
    > Once we do specify a new public key algorithm (e.g. post-quantum), as
    > opposed to just a new curve (my expectation is that adding post-quantum
    > algorithms will be the next "crypto refresh", and that we will never
    > need a new curve after Curve448), I fully agree that we definitely
    > shouldn't do this byte-string-in-MPI thing again. When we do so, we
    > could specify a new octet string type, or something else. But I'm not
    > sure that between Curve25519 and Curve448 is the correct place to "draw
    > the line in the sand".

I don't think that it's right to think of post-quantum as being a 
crypto-refresh.
That is, replacement of one set of algorithms with another.
Rather, I think it's better to try to think about this as being multiple
algorithms present at the same time.

having said that, we shouldn't allow better to get in the way of good enough.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT 
consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

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