I also support adoption. The draft has long been ready for it. The various
details being discussed here sound like something that can be resolved
after adoption. (Or in parallel since folks seem eager to discuss them now,
but they need not block adoption.) Adoption is the start of the process,
not
Following the feedback from the last TLS meeting at IETF@121, I have opened
> this PR to change the name from X25519MLKEM768 to MLKEM768X25519. This
> change aligns with draft-ietf-tls-hybrid-design-11 (section 3.2).
>
> https://github.com/post-quantum-cryptography/draft-kwiatkowski-tls-ecdhe-mlkem
The current editor's copy of the keylogfile draft says:
> New assignments in the "SSLKEYLOGFILE Labels" registry
> will be administered by IANA through IETF Review procedure [RFC8126].
I want to ask if we think that this is the right choice. Generally, we've
learned to pick more open registrat
> My inclination is to suggest that we pick Specification Required, with a
> recommendation to experts to reject registrations if the secret can be used
> to derive other secrets. For instance, we don't define a label for the
> resumption secret or any of the secrets that form the main trunk of
On Thu, Dec 12, 2024, at 10:46, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> My inclination is to suggest that we pick Specification Required, with a
>> recommendation to experts to reject registrations if the secret can be used
>> to derive other secrets. For instance, we don't define a label for the
>> resumption s
