I encourage them to try it out. In many use cases *hybrid* PQ TLS 1.3 outperforms non-PQ TLS 1.2.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 5:10 PM Paul Wouters <paul= [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I was asked by a TLS participant to relay some information publicly > regarding their pure PQ mlkem use case. I have rephrased their ontribution > in my own words below. > > There is a use case for MLKEM in the market of high-frequency > trading. Apparently there were complaints from those users (eg > traders) in the past about the performane impact of migrating > to TLS 1.2. If there is a performance drop with TLS 1.3 with an > MLKEM hybrid, then migration to PQ (or TLS 1.3) would stall. If > they can offer a (even tiny) performance gain of TLS 1.3 MLKEM > over TLS 1.2 ECDHE, then this individual would have a strong > case to deploy PQ security. Otherwise, the traders will insist > on waiting until a CRQC is publicly known to exist. > > The individual stated they are in favour of adoption the pure mlkem > document along with the hybrid document so people can pick either, > depending in their use cases. > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
