First, the reference document for them is [draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement-03<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.iana.org/go/draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement-03__;!!GjvTz_vk!UT5DfenG5GFwog3zj3pnBf2CfQ8U3ps-1zmjsoW5qlY3nST3fnZg8RAiyx_E027hJIQPZQ5mprnJPuOjud8NOyDwClAj$>], however -03 doesn't specify the same codepoint values as the IANA chart. -05 specifies the correct values.
We will ask IANA to update the reference (I’m one of the designated experts) Second, draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement (-03 and -05) is inconsistent with capitalization of the naming, e.g. As Viktor explained, the OpenSSL issue is not an issue. IANA went with the uppercase naming, while OpenSSL went with lower. Lowercase is generally more consistent with the other IANA codepoints, with some exceptions including the recent hybrids. For what it's worth, the slightly different bikeshed shade that I prefer is lowercase. Changing the name is a WG decision, presumably during the process of finalizing the RFC.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
