[openpgp] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-openpgp-replacementke y-05.txt

Hi, all.

On 17 Aug 2025, at 15:24, Andrew Gallagher <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The following questions raised by dkg remain open. I asked for other opinions, but nobody else has yet responded:
> ...
> * Whether to specify (here or elsewhere?) that all unknown revocation reasons are hard.

I have thought about this again, and maybe the best thing to do in this draft is remove the references to “soft” and “hard” revocation reasons, and instead refer to “Key is superseded” vs “any other reason”. The draft already says:

* if a Replacement Key subpacket is included in a revocation signature, then the Reason For Revocation subpacket SHOULD indicate "Key is superseded”.

This already implies that “Key is retired and no longer used” SHOULD NOT be used with a Replacement Key subpacket. If we make this explicit, then we should be able to sidestep the question of “what is a hard revocation".

Any objection to the above?

A

_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=iHLO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----