OpenPGPv5 wish list

[Jean-Jacques]

Le Mon, 29 Apr 2013 01:17:04 -0400,
"Robert J. Hansen" <rjh at sixdemonbag.org> a écrit :

> On 4/28/2013 10:37 PM, Hauke Laging wrote:
> > Other things we IMHO really need notation standards for:
> 
> This really isn't the place for it, guys.  GnuPG-devel is for
> discussion of how to make GnuPG track the standard better; the
> OpenPGP list is for discussion of how to make the standard itself
> better.

Yep, so I switched the thread to the other mailing list.
> 
> > Things I want in the protocol:
> 
> I'll make my own wish list simple:
> 
> I don't want *anything* new included in the standard unless there
> exists at least one user who says, "the absence of this feature is a
> showstopper for me and is blocking my adoption of GnuPG."  This user
> needs to be able to show a real-world use case and be willing to
> volunteer to run trials in a real-world environment.
> 
> No real-world user?  No feature.

So I answered because I really "need" such feature in OpenPGP for
real-world :

2) What is the key used for?

And I see at least 4 purposes :
 - To authenticate itself through TLS  [RFC6091]
 - Maybe To sign other certificates (subkeys on smartcard issues)
 - To authenticate through HTTP (gpgauth or
   https://github.com/Open-UDC/open-udc/blob/master/docs/HTTP_OpenPGP_Authentication.draft.txt)
 - To sign an OpenUDC transaction.

I work especially on the 2 last purposes. And having the possibility
for the owner to set descriptions, or more flags on its (sub)keys inside
its OpenPGP certificate, would be a more elegant solution than some
workaround we have to manage.

> 
> That's my own wish list, and I desperately hope it comes to pass.  :)
> 
We have to better organize A wish list, or it will be a mess to
identify their elements. :-)

---
jbar.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20130429/3dfdaf07/attachment.sig>