> On Nov 3, 2024, at 4:31 PM, Joseph Salowey wrote:
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Oct 25, 2024, at 3:03 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 08:30:45AM -0400, Sean Turner wrote:
>>
>>> The TLS list is infamous in that it is regarded by some as [insert
>>> your descri
Hi! Did you know the TLS WG has a FAQ? Well, we do; see [0]. Please consult it
before:
• Bringing new work to the WG
• Registering Speciation Required code points for extensions, cipher
suites, exporter labels, etc.
• Requesting agenda time
Also, please note that you too can submit
I strongly prefer 3.
In the ML-KEM spec, the consistency checks on the public keys are marked as
optional, so I think it would be a fair interpretation of FIPS 140-3 that
the required consistency checks consist of the optionally allowed empty set
in the case of ML-KEM.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 7:1
On 14/01/2025 18:48, Filippo Valsorda wrote:
Two participants sending a dozen emails in support of solution A, and
six participants sending one email each in support of solution B can
look a lot like there is no consensus, or that there is consensus for
solution A, especially if not all object
It appears that Bob Beck said:
>
>
>> On Jan 14, 2025, at 12:20 PM, Dang, Quynh H. (Fed)
>> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe consensus calls can only be made and completed at the in-person
>> meetings ?
>
>The problem with in-person (or even virtual at the in-person meetings) is it
>then becomes even mor
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 11:44 AM Dennis Jackson wrote:
> On 14/01/2025 18:48, Filippo Valsorda wrote:
>
> Two participants sending a dozen emails in support of solution A, and six
> participants sending one email each in support of solution B can look a lot
> like there is no consensus, or that t
On Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 10:49 AM Filippo Valsorda
wrote:
> 2024-10-25 14:30 GMT+02:00 Sean Turner :
>
> • Repetition of arguments without providing substantive new information
> • Requesting an unreasonable amount of work to provide information
>
>
> Personally, the reason I find the list (and gene
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-hybrid-design-12.txt is now available. It is a
work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF.
Title: Hybrid key exchange in TLS 1.3
Authors: Douglas Stebila
Scott Fluhrer
Shay Gueron
Name:draft-ietf-tls-hybrid-de
Hi all,
It is sad to know that many people would like to join in the discussions but
decide not to do so because of their anticipation of the pain they would get
and the time they would need to spend.
There are ways to help the situation. For example, the chairs could decide to
say that 80% a
> On Jan 14, 2025, at 12:20 PM, Dang, Quynh H. (Fed)
> wrote:
>
> Maybe consensus calls can only be made and completed at the in-person
> meetings ?
The problem with in-person (or even virtual at the in-person meetings) is it
then becomes even more of a pay-to-play proposition to participa
2024-10-25 14:30 GMT+02:00 Sean Turner :
> • Repetition of arguments without providing substantive new information
> • Requesting an unreasonable amount of work to provide information
Personally, the reason I find the list (and generally the IETF) unwelcoming is
that arguments can easily prevail
Dang, Quynh H. (Fed) writes:
>Maybe consensus calls can only be made and completed at the in-person
>meetings ?
Ugh, that would make the existing situation where a lot of important decisions
are made at in-person meetings and then presented as a fait accomplis to the
list even worse, only big pl
Moreover, it means that someone who is not available at the time of the
meeting for whatever reason even if it’s not money (for example, they have
a conflict with another wg) is now excluded. There is a good reason why we
do consensus on mailing lists. If participants are engaging in dos attacks
yo
13 matches
Mail list logo
