Standards and PGP wraper

Werner Koch wk at
Sun Nov 8 17:18:08 CET 1998

Michael Roth <mroth at> writes:

> my plans to create a "extended" gnupg version wich is 100% compatible with  
> pgp2.6. I discarded all my plans on this subject. :-)

I agree :-)

> "type 20 should be default, but provide a way for creating pgp compatible
> packets and keys because pgp is really widly spread." 

There is no technical reason to use type 20 and ElGamal Signatures are
much slower to verify than DSA sigs and they are not needed.
The default is to use type 17 (DSA sign-only) and type 16 (Elgamal for
encryption only).  

I'd suggest, that everyone who has a subkey (which is used for
encryption) of type 20 should drop this one and make a new one with
type 16 - There is no problem with signatures, because the subkey is 
bound to the primary key and only this one sis certified by others.

> features/functions of a wrapper. For example I think we don't need
> key management in the wrapper!?

I think key import/export and listing of the ring is important.


More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list