On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 06:41:09AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > The text here isn't totally generic, as it refers to scalar multiplication > and u-coordinate > point input. So, if we had some other ECDH-type thing that didn't have these > concepts, then we would have yet new text. > > In the interest of the minimal change, I suggest: > > "For X25519 and X448, the calculations are as follows" > ... > > "For these curves, implementations SHOULD use..." > > How does that sound?
Yeah, passable. I do not think it is likely we need to add another DH function (due to threat of QC making ((H)EC)DH go away), and even if we do, it is just some extra text. The PQC asymmetric key exchanges will be KEMs, which have pretty different behavior from existing things. -Ilari _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
