On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 12:11:27PM +0000, Matt Caswell wrote: > > The proposal discussed was that while relaxing the conceptual model, > most of the existing implementations would still require both. The EC > implementation would be relaxed however. This essentially gives largely > compatible behaviour between 1.1.1 and 3.0. > > The vote text is as follows: > > topic: For 3.0 EVP_PKEY keys, the OTC accepts the following resolution: > * relax the conceptual model to allow private keys to exist without public > components; > * all implementations apart from EC require the public component to be > present; > * relax implementation for EC key management to allow private keys that > do not > contain public keys and > * our decoders unconditionally generate the public key (where possible). > > Proposed by Matt Caswell > Public: yes > opened: 2020-11-03 > closed: 2020-mm-dd > accepted: yes/no (for: X, against: Y, abstained: Z, not voted: T)
So I think being compatible with what 1.1.1 does is important. And what the text does is try to make rules for what 1.1.1 does, but as far as I understand it, it's not really describing what 1.1.1 does. I think we should just fix the regressions. For fixing the regressions we don't need a vote. You can argue that that would violate some rule or model that some people think we have, but clearly we didn't have it. So I'm voting -1. Kurt
