Hi Martin,
As Sofía correctly saw, this is just plain TLS with the "straightforward"
DH->KEM and Sig->PQ-Sig substitutions.
I, of course, do have another 50 pages on how KEMTLS performs and compare
it to these results, but I will save those for another day ;-)
Cheers,
Thom
PQShield
Op di 27 ju
Thanks! These results are pretty much in line with expectations.
It looks like you don't model packet loss and the effect of that. One concern I
have is that increases in the number of packets will significantly increase
exposure to loss. 1-(1-p)^n tends to increase quite a bit as n increases.
Hi Martin,
Op di 27 jun 2023 om 13:18 schreef Martin Thomson :
> Thanks! These results are pretty much in line with expectations.
>
Indeed, I don't think there are any results that are surprising when you
know all of the details of the algorithms. But I do hope that this set of
experiments prov
Thanks for preparing the excerpt; this will be helpful for many use cases.
(For the WebPKI, as you already mention, we also need to consider SCTs and
realistically crappy networks.)
"this is LTE in a city", and "this is what a poor-quality rural 3G link
> looks like". But alas, these don't seem t
Hi Bas,
Op di 27 jun 2023 om 14:44 schreef Bas Westerbaan :
> Thanks for preparing the excerpt; this will be helpful for many use cases.
> (For the WebPKI, as you already mention, we also need to consider SCTs and
> realistically crappy networks.)
>
> "this is LTE in a city", and "this is what a
Imo, we have been measuring handshake time as an indication or performance, but
time-to-last-byte or time-to-x%-byte should be used instead. There is nothing
wrong with your study Thom. It is pretty detailed and useful. I just think that
if these new algos get deployed, we would know if their im
