Re: extension mechanism needed

[Jon Callas <jon@xxxxxxx>]

At 10:21 AM 11/14/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote:

   Understanding armour _isn't_ very hard; I'd prefer MUST,
   especially since it's needed for backward compatibility with PGP 5.0
   (in particular, the Encrypt Clipboard doesn't do MIME.)
   Generating it is a matter of taste - will PGP 5.0 always accept MIME?
   Even in applications like Decrypt/Verify Clipboard?

Thanks Bill. I agree completely. From PRZ's first documents, he labeled
armoring as an integral piece of PGP. It's too useful as a generalized
mechanism for holding an object (data, keys, etc.) without having to worry
about what odd thing something will do to your binary.

	Jon



-----
Jon Callas                                  jon@xxxxxxx
Chief Scientist                             555 Twin Dolphin Drive
Pretty Good Privacy, Inc.                   Suite 570
(415) 596-1960                              Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Fingerprints: D1EC 3C51 FCB1 67F8 4345 4A04 7DF9 C2E6 F129 27A9 (DSS)
              665B 797F 37D1 C240 53AC 6D87 3A60 4628           (RSA)