Hi Deirdre, > > My take is that if the authors trim the document's attempt at soft > > advocacy for use of non-hybrid ML-KEM, and just specify it clearly > > Is this in reference to the Motivations section? That can definitely be > trimmed but was iterated on multiple times because of complaints that the > motivation were 'not sufficient' etc
I do not think there is a conflict. The problem was (and is) not the amount of text, but the broad scope. Thereby writing more -- and more detailed -- text for what we consider an acceptible use case (and what not) may actually result in less "advocacy". -- TBB
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
