On 20.11.2024 08:31, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
At that time, my intention was introducing Ed448 and X448 and making the
things aligned (while the specification for EdSOMETHING for OpenPGP was
not yet finished). My intention was interoperability actually, but
alas, opposite outcome.
Thanks for the explanation, Niibe. I understand your intention now.
Alternative design (which sadly wouldn't be backwards compatible) would
be to avoid the MPI altogether and just have a fixed size field:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9580#name-algorithm-specific-fields-for-ed2
I'm just noting that for completeness, not suggesting you do that :)
Thanks again and have a nice day!
Kind regards,
Wiktor
_______________________________________________
Gnupg-devel mailing list
Gnupg-devel@gnupg.org
https://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel
