Re: Closing the openpgp working group

[Jon Callas <jon@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>
> And while we are at it, I would suggest to express V5 fingerprints  
> (as well
> as key IDs) either in octal or in decimal. This is not a  
> cryptography issue
> (*), but a usability issue on (typically mobile) devices with  
> numeric-only
> keypads. As an added benefit, it would make the keyID ~ telephone  
> number
> metaphor more sustainable.
>
> For such a decision, OpenPGP could earn the ethernal gratitude of  
> the entire
> telecom industry.

I think we should not tie non SHA-1 fingerprints to V5 key ids.

I like the proposal someone had at one point that you have a syntax  
that includes the hash number. Thus, a present fingerprint would become:

2:012356789ABCDEF...

A SHA-256 version would be:

8:FEDCBA987654.....

Within this, if you want a shorter version of the fingerprint, you  
simply truncate the right-most portion (which "fixes" the present  
mechanism).

Once you have this mechanism, a way to do a fingerprint in decimal or  
octal is pretty easy. It's also easy for telephones to map the ':' to  
a '*' (e.g.).

I leave the exact signal for a different radix as an exercise for  
someone to suggest.

	Jon


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 2.6.3
Charset: US-ASCII

wj8DBQFH2t9csTedWZOD3gYRAh/RAJ9nrAV4gIWAGII7gXBhyrxBj+PaKgCg2pCe
5f7X5YRUDDdgg+vmlDw+siU=
=r0IL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----