On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 11:10 AM Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> > Hiya, > > On 17/04/2025 18:56, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL wrote: > > One reason hybrids add risks is the practical implementation/ > > deployment/processes/management/maintenance part, as opposed to > > treating the issue as a pure mathematical formula - which deployed > > software apparently is not (some might argue that it should be, I > > let the reality speak for itself). > > I'm relatively confident that the set of implementations that only > do pure-PQ and don't do hybrid will be so small as to make the > above an unconvincing argument. > Well, it's a typical source of disagreement. I said "do not support" because the non-hybrid "Supported Groups" are already in the registry. But I'm not going to run around objecting or appealing. Some participants care about FIPS, various EU laws, UK laws, etc. Others don't. It's always better to find common ground in engineering concerns. Otherwise, you get into entitlement (my laws are the important ones... etc). thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
