Hi Paul, Quoting from your email:
> WG Chairs view [is] that the consensus call passed This is surprising. I’m not sure how the IETF defines consensus these days, but I personally do not see any clear consensus on this draft. Nadim Kobeissi Symbolic Software • https://symbolic.software > On 20 Feb 2026, at 4:00 PM, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > [ AD hat on ] > > All, > > I want to remind people that the goal of this 2nd WGLC is to focus on > the new text changed in responds to the conclusion of the 1st WGLC. > > We already had a WGLC on this document [1] and the conclusion [2] was > that it passed WGLC provided some clarifying text would be added that > stated that for the general use case, hybrids were preferred. This > 2nd WGLC is about that topic. > > There is an appeal chain that got muddled by the inappropriate use of > derivative clauses that is still in progress, but so far yielded the AD > statement [3] that confirmed the WG Chairs view that the consensus call > passed. There is an appeal with the IESG [4] on that decision, and this > document will not be placed in the RFC Editor queue until that appeal has > concluded, but will also not stop all processing while the appeal runs. > > This 2nd WGLC is meant to get those people who provisionally said "yes" > to publication of this document pending some extra text, to review this > text and let us know if that resolves the conditional part of their > "yes" statement. The text changes to discuss can be seen at: > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-05&url2=draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-07&difftype=--html > > > I understand this is a heated topic. I am also not hearing from people > that they have changed their opinion on whether or not to publish this > document at all. Confirming your views are fine, but again, that is not > the goal of this 2nd WGLC. It would be helpful if, especially those > people who wanted additional clarifying text, to give us feedback on > this. And ideally, offer up suggestions that would address any still > outstanding issues. > > Thanks, > > Paul > > [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/Pzdox1sDDG36q19PWDVPghsiyXA/ > [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/Gc6KVPrVHn-QCkeEcvJ_qtRcFxY/ > [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/dzPT8KQe4S-_pZROLUJMvS9pM0M/ > [4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iesg/appeals/artifact/230 > > _______________________________________________ > 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]
