[messaging] IETF standardization of a next-gen messaging protocol

Ben Laurie ben at links.org
Sun Oct 2 07:52:55 PDT 2016

On 2 October 2016 at 13:39, Ximin Luo <infinity0 at pwned.gg> wrote:
> I can see the benefits in agreeing to standardise a cryptographic component
> including the packet flows and algorithms, but standardising the exact wire
> representation is less useful (and people have less incentive to do it) if
> there is no need for interoperation. For example, even ed25519 private keys
> have no standard format; there are about 3 different ones and everyone picks
> their own. Not that this *particular example* is a big deal, I'm just
> demonstrating how lack of interoperability reduces the need to standardise.

Lack of interop is a bug, not a feature.

More information about the Messaging mailing list