[openpgp] Re: Fwd: I-D list for Open Specification for Pre tty Good Privacy notification: Changes to draft-gallagher-openp gp-code-point-exhaustion

Justus Winter <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.openpgp
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Andrew,

Andrew Gallagher <[email protected]> writes:

> tl;dr: please keep code points >=128 free, because if at some point in
> the future we needed to extend the algorithm registry to more than a
> single octet, having these code points available would let us define a
> UTF8-like self-synchronising encoding that would be fully backwards
> compatible with all existing wire formats.

I'm not a fan of this.  First, we discussed code point exhaustion while
working on RFC9580, and decided that it is not a concern.  We are
nowhere near exhausting any code point space, not even the relatively
tiny packet tag space.

Then, you couldn't use multi-byte code points in any existing packet
version, because that would turn what every software on this planet
expects to be a fixed-size field into a variable-sized field, and
failing to understand the scheme leads to catastrophic loss of parser
synchronization (maybe with security implications).

Therefore, multi-byte code points can only be used in newer packet
versions.  But, if we design new packet versions, we can just make them
use a two-byte field for the code point in question, and say that the
new algorithms must only be used with the new packet version.

You bring up the comparison with UTF-8.  For text, we are interested in
storing it efficiently, and are okay with a complex encoding.  I don't
think this holds for our code points.  And even if storage efficiency
were a concern, a two-byte code point, or even a four-byte code point,
compares very favorably with OIDs.

Finally, your solution to the (again, non-existant) code point scarcity
makes the problem worse by halving the existing space.

Best,
Justus

_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 584 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=Xsxd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.