On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Adam Langley <a...@imperialviolet.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Viktor Dukhovni > <ietf-d...@dukhovni.org> wrote: > > AFAIK the signature detailes are not pinned down yet. Is this > > allocation in anticipation of the final details? > > It might well be that the X25519 and X448 code points are suitable for > early assignment while the signature code points are not since the > signature work in CFRG is ongoing. I'll leave that to the chairs. > > (While we would use early code-point assignments for X25519/X448 we > don't have plans for using the signature code points at this time. I'm fine either way. As Adam says, it wouldn't be harmful to wait for the signature code point assignments for a bit, but I doubt it would be that harmful not to. People who deploy the signature schemes before they are stable do so at their own risk. Also, that risk seems low since you're not going to have public certificates with these schemes until they are stable. -Ekr > > > Cheers > > AGL > > -- > Adam Langley a...@imperialviolet.org https://www.imperialviolet.org > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
