On 15/09/2021 16.41, Daniel Migault wrote:
Outside experimentation, especially for national algorithms, this will lead to nations having their algorithms qualified as standard while other nations having their algorithms qualified as non standard. I would like to understand why this cannot be a problem.
I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused about which nations would get standard algorithms. Are P-256 and P-384 considered "national" crypto? I know they're from NIST, but they seem widely popular outside USA. Technically we have old GOST algo(s) on standards track, though they are already obsolete in its nation, so those? Or some other (planned) algorithm I've missed? Apart from that, I personally think that allowing "cheaper" allocations of algorithm numbers *reduces* this disparity/problem instead of making it worse, but perhaps I'm missing the essence of the issue.
Interoperability could be mentioned for reference, though in practice having a standard does not necessarily help that much, e.g. Ed25519 validation levels are still rather low after four years with standard and Ed448 is probably even worse: https://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2021-06/eddi.html
--Vladimir _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
