Subject: AW: Reasons to include ECC to our charter

From: "Dominikus Scherkl" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:49:49 +0200

> You can't add [ECC] to the _standard_ because of restrictive
licensing.
?!?
The openPGP standard is exactly this - "open". So of course we can add
ECC (it is still reserved). Or do you mean patents on ECC?
That is also no Problem, because patents only apply to the applications
that implement the standard - they need to licence the algorithms.
If not licenced, the application may not support ECC (but is still
conform to the standard - same as for elgamal).
-- 
Dominikus Scherkl
Biodata Application Security AG
mail: [email-masked]

---

From: Thomas Roessler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 17:04:05 +0200

On 2001-08-09 16:49:49 +0200, Dominikus Scherkl wrote:

>The openPGP standard is exactly this - "open". So of course we can 
>add ECC (it is still reserved). Or do you mean patents on ECC? 
>That is also no Problem, because patents only apply to the 
>applications that implement the standard - they need to licence 
>the algorithms. If not licenced, the application may not support 
>ECC (but is still conform to the standard - same as for elgamal).

That is, ECC can't be a mandatory part of the standard.

-- 
Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/