On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 10:35:15PM +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > On 02/03/2026 22:18, Salz, Rich wrote: > > Doesn’t the RECOMMENDED=N entry, coupled with the change to > > RECOMMENDED=Y for the hybrids do that? > > I don't believe so. There can be many hybrids and each would > need a Y for the above to be true, which is not something I'd > say the WG would want, and in any case, anyone can add another > hybrid with a N this potentially confusing matters.
I think Stephen has it; the two things are qualtatively different levels of granularity. > I'll risk being boring: we should state our general current > preference for hybrids (assuming we have one) as a security area > bcp and that'd reduce the amount of discussion not just in this > WG but others too. I think I failed to actually chime in on this topic earlier in the thread, but I support this approach and if we took that route it would supersede my specific concerns on this draft (that is, we'd have to rework this draft to put it in the context of the BCP, which would be a different reworking than what I'm advocating for in the absence of such a BCP). Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
