Re: Straw Poll on group name

[pgut001%cs.auckland.ac.nz@localhost (Peter Gutmann)]

>In your response to the poll, please:
> a) explain the one you prefer and why.

[A].  SSH will need to maintain its own registry anyway even if we go for [B]
(the exact definition of "group 2048" will need to be specified somewhere in
the same way that "group 2" will), and monotonically-increasing small integers
are much cleaner and more flexible than a pile of arbitrary-sized numbers.  In
addition the fixed-bit-size numbers are non-reusable, so if (for example) a
problem is found in "group 2048" necessitating its replacement with a
different "group 2048" without the problem, there's no way to do it.  With
"group 2" you just replace it with "group 3".

As for the "group 14" issue, just CNAME it to "group 2" with a note about it
being that way for historical purposes, it's an absolutely trivial fix.

> b) list any options you find unacceptable and explain why.

[C].  It's tying SSH to the (unpredictable and uncontrollable) decisions of a
completely unrelated standards group.

Peter.