So what are they doing ... That cannot be done within the existing type definer?
If folks need an extension, there are two reasons: 1) the concept needs replacing (eg define life do pgp Certs are undefinable) 2) one needs the tcp or http stack to be doing interpretation, before connect establish. I can guess this is related to dnssec, preventing connection establish if the tcp engine cannot confirm the new-cert is registered by DNs All part of the militarization of the web, I suspect. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 3, 2012, at 12:26 PM, "Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos" <n...@gnutls.org> wrote: > Hello, > It seem that the IETF TLS working group is defining a new certificate > type extension, which in short makes the openpgp certificate type > extension obsolete. The authors of the new draft are not very keen into > adding the openpgp key type into the new certificate type extension, > based on the fact that this is not widely used. So my question is does > it really make sense to pursue that? Are there applications using gnutls > with openpgp keys? > > And even more, if it is shown they are not widely used, does it make > sense to support openpgp keys in gnutls at all? > > regards, > Nikos > > _______________________________________________ > Gnutls-devel mailing list > gnutls-de...@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnutls-devel _______________________________________________ Help-gnutls mailing list Help-gnutls@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnutls