Hiya,
I'm opposed to adoption, at this time. - I think we ought to encourage hybrids but not pure PQ KEMs and so adopting documents on hybrid KEMs can make sense so we can more easily get to a reommended="Y" in the IANA registry when the WG wants to - I don't see what criteria we might use in adopting this that wouldn't leave the WG open to accusations of favouritism if we don't adopt other pure PQ national standards that will certainly arise For the above reasons, I think following the old practice of telling the ISE we have no objection to this ending up as an independent stream RFC is the better approach for this one, and similar ones. If/as confidence in pure-PQ KEMs grows or a CRQC is closer to being demonstrated we could revisit things then. I do understand that some people will want/need to use this, but figure an ISE RFC is better in this case. Cheers, S. On 01/04/2025 13:58, IETF Secretariat wrote:
The TLS WG has placed draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement in state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Sean Turner) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement/ _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
