From: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 93 14:48:04 PDT
To: derek@cs.wisc.edu (Derek Zahn)
Subject: Re: Toolkit
In-Reply-To: <9309222124.AA24232@balder.cs.wisc.edu>
Message-ID: <9309222144.AA01084@toxicwaste.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> Well, this highlights an issue -- should a Toolkit be based
> on PGP or RSAREF?  If the releasers of PGP are disinclined
> toward the project, perhaps RSAREF would make more sense
> (though I suppose that depends on how much cypherpunks hate
> RSAREF).

No, you misunderstand.  The "releasers of PGP" are ***NOT***
disinclined towards the project.  They are implementing your
suggestions for the next release!!!!!  The next release will, short of
actually BUILDING the library, have a set of functions that a
programmer can use to access the crypto routines and let anyone, for
example, put a front end on the pgp system!!!

No, the PGP implementors are not ignoring you.  Rather, they are in
the process of doing just as you have asked, and have been doing so
for some months now.  If you start work with the current (2.3A) PGP
release, then you will just be re-implementing something that the PGP
developers have been working on for a long time!

As I said, be patient.  What you want is right around the corner, but
if you jump out too soon, you might get hit by that proverbial truck
which is right in front of it!!!!  It will come to you soon enough!!

> > -derek
> 
> derek
> (er, damn, the *other* derek)

-derek  Damn, this is confusing!!! ;-)