> First, it's basic courtesy. Whenever the WG gets a LS from another SDO, it > should respond I agree with this. It makes sense to respond, in simple technical terms. Not with judgement, not with assumption of ill intent by any parties. Just plain technical advice.
Cheers, Andrei -----Original Message----- From: Jim Reid <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2026 9:18 PM To: Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: [EXTERNAL] [TLS] Re: LS on the work item related to QKD and TLS integration framework in SG13 [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > On 21 Mar 2026, at 21:59, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm not particularly a fan of QKD, but I don't really understand why > we have to weigh in on this LS. First, it's basic courtesy. Whenever the WG gets a LS from another SDO, it should respond. Even if it's only to say thanks or "we don't care" or "we're already doing this" or "this idea is stupid/bad/wrong". It's not a good look to just ignore LSes. I understand the datatracker automagically acknowledges receipt of an inbound LS. That isn't a response IMO. Second, from my experience on Planet ITU, silence implies consent. When there's no response to a LS, Study Groups are generally minded to assume the recipient approves of whatever it says. "They said nothing, so we've got a green light from them. Full steam ahead!" That can have very unfortunate consequences. Finally some Study Group participants use LSes as a tactic to delay or block Bad Ideas: "let's wait until we've heard from $SDO". It undermines those making that argument when $SDO does not respond. Those who push for LSes to the IETF are often trying to keep ITU-T on a tight leash and not duplicate or interfere with work best done at the IETF. They deserve our support. Persuading a SG to send a LS can be hard work. That effort shouldn't count for nothing. Having said all that, I have no knowledge what happened at SG13 which lead to them sending an LS to the WG. Or what plans SG13 has to dabble in TLS. Not that this matters. The WG got a LS. IMO it should send a response. _______________________________________________ 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]
