[Cryptography] upgrade mechanisms and policies

Ray Dillinger bear at sonic.net
Sun Apr 12 15:56:11 EDT 2015



On 04/10/2015 11:50 AM, ianG wrote:
> On 7/04/2015 15:16 pm, John Denker wrote:

>> For crypto primitives as well as higher-level protocols,
>> all-too-often we lack both /mechanism/ and /policy/ for
>> outroduction (at the end of the life cycle).

> (Nice neologism!  I wonder if a better spelling of that is outreduction ?)

I have a long history of failing at this, but the experience has
taught me to notice when something *isn't* a failure...  and I
have to agree that this is a nice neologism.

And that's IMPORTANT.  If you give something an official-sounding
name, people take it more seriously.  "Outroduction" sounds like
a positive action that is an agenda item in itself, whereas
"end-of-life" or "phase out" sound like just stepping back and
not paying attention to something until it dies.

And the whole point is that we DO have to get people to pay
attention.  Especially the kind of people who like big important-
sounding words that seem like they are positive agenda items
that must be planned and executed.

				Bear



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20150412/2f5d336c/attachment.sig>


More information about the cryptography mailing list