Subject: Draft openPGP ECC formats

From: "Dominikus Scherkl" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:17:54 +0200

Hello.

We consider a new document (attached) about how to store elliptic
curve cipher keys and signatures in openPGP messages and how to
encrypt/decrypt with ECC vs. sign and verify with ECDSA.

You can find it also under
http://download.biodata.com/documents/draft-ietf-openpgp-ecc-formats.txt

Best Regards.
-- 
Dominikus Scherkl
Biodata Application Security AG
mail: [email-masked]

---

From: John W Noerenberg II <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:47:11 +0100

>http://download.biodata.com/documents/draft-ietf-openpgp-ecc-formats.txt

Please submit this as a personal draft.  This is not a working group 
item at present.
-- 

john noerenberg
[email-masked]
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Peace of mind isn't at all superficial, really.  It's the whole thing.
   That which produces it is good maintenance; that which disturbs it
   is poor maintenance.
   -- Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Robert M. Pirsig, 1974
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: John W Noerenberg II <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 18:49:07 +0100

I've requested Dominikus edit his draft to conform to IETF 
guidelines, and resubmit it as a personal draft.  Currently,  further 
specification of ECC is not part of our charter, although it might be 
necessary in order for elliptic curves to be useful within OpenPGP.

Once his draft has been accepted as I-D, I would like your opinions 
on whether is should be included as a WG item.  Are implementers 
utilizing ECC in their implementations?

I've asked Dominikus to elaborate his reasons to the WG for including 
his draft within our charter, once his draft has been accepted as an 
I-D.  Please give his note and his draft careful consideration.

Thanks!
-- 

john noerenberg
[email-masked]

---

From: Will Price <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 00:51:14 -0700

John:

PGP would be strongly supportive of including an ECC draft 
within the charter of the WG. While we do not support ECC now, 
the lack of a draft certainly does not help any potential for 
supporting it in the future.

On Wednesday, August 8, 2001, at 10:49 AM, John W Noerenberg II wrote:

> guidelines, and resubmit it as a personal draft.  Currently,  
> further specification of ECC is not part of our charter, 
> although it might be necessary in order for elliptic curves to 
> be useful within OpenPGP.
>
> Once his draft has been accepted as I-D, I would like your 
> opinions on whether is should be included as a WG item.  Are 
> implementers utilizing ECC in their implementations?
>
> I've asked Dominikus to elaborate his reasons to the WG for 
> including his draft within our charter, once his draft has been 
> accepted as an I-D.  Please give his note and his draft careful 
> consideration.

--

Will Price, Director of Engineering
PGP Security, Inc.
a division of Network Associates, Inc.

---

From: Rodney Thayer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 11:34:45 -0700

This implies severe process failure -- the draft editor isn't
supposed to let drafts get in without permission from the WG chair.

(A hard lesson we learned in IPsec...)

At 01:47 PM 8/8/01 +0100, John  W Noerenberg II wrote:

>Please submit this as a personal draft.  This is not a working group item 
>at present.
>--
>
>john noerenberg
>[email-masked]

---

From: John W Noerenberg II <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:39:18 +0100

>supposed to let drafts get in without permission from the WG chair.

There is no restriction on personal submissions.  Dominikus was 
unaware of IETF procedures.  We have discussed it, and he has agreed 
to resubmit it as a personal draft.

To reassure you, the rfc-editor did not accept the document w/o 
consulting with me, and I explained to Dominikus why it could not be 
submitted as a WG document.

-- 

john noerenberg
[email-masked]