[openpgp] Ketan Talaulikar's Discuss on draft-ietf-openpgp-p qc-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Ketan Talaulikar via Datatracker <[email protected]> Thu, 11 Dec 2025 11:08:32 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.openpgp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <176548011247.1564400.6442543780793763727@dt-datatracker-5bd94c585b-wk4l4> |
Ketan Talaulikar has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc-14: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-openpgp-pqc/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks to the authors and the WG for their work on this document. I have one aspect of this document that I would like to discuss. The document is updating RFC9580, but is not specifying what is it that is it modifying in that base OpenPGP spec. Is the introduction of new algorithms/codepoints and the use of composite/hybrid approach for KEM and certificates an extension of OpenPGP or is updating (as in say fixing or changing the working) of OpenPGP? My impression (and I could be wrong) is that this is an extension to OpenPGP? In either case, a short summary or description of what is being updated in or done differently than what is in RFC9850 in the abstract and introduction would help clarify for readers and address this discussion point. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I have just one nit to bring to your attention. I believe the correct term is "public key" and not "public-key". This is the case even in the base RFC9850 that is being updated. _______________________________________________ openpgp mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]