> This sounds like you are not objecting to adoption, but objecting only > to publication as is? No consensus call for moving this document forward > as is (eg WGLC) has been requested for this document yet. It is expected > to be discussed in the WG, and I encourage everyone to propose text to > improve the document.
I still believe that not adopting this would have been better, but I am willing to follow along and help improve the document. After all, perhaps someone will convince me in the future that there are situations where PQ-only KEMs are better :) -- TBB
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
