Joe Smith wrote:
Be careful with this. First of all both the second and third packet can be implemented as the first packet type.That's the point of the first packet - to be able to express anything the user can think of. However, the other two packets are there to save space by not using string identifier. They are also easier to implement.
Second encouraging users to place extra data into theie keys is just asking for problem. Imaginge when somebody decides to attaches a 50 MiB mpeg to their key, and uploads it to the keyservers.Unfortunately I am not asking for problem, the problem is already here. Users already can upload their photo albums to keyserver and no-one can stop them. One vCard and a few preferences really won't make it any worse, these are small compared to images.
Third and most importantly, Anything for specifying pgpmime vs inline mime should be avoided. Let the experts (The openpgp working group) hash these things out.I have already contacted the openpgp working group, but they are in last call and so it is unlikely that they will implement similar mechanism.
For example there is the pgp corp implementation: http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/msg08704.html
This solves only just one little bit. Not considering the feasibility, is it possible to achieve this with GnuPG? Thanks, David
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
