My comment was based on the observation that the document discusses several aspects beyond directly modifying RFC 9325, as it also provides broader guidance on related topics.
I disagree. It modifies 9325 and then the rest of the document gives the rationale for those decisions. PQ is only one of the reasons. It gets its own detailed section because PQ is a common topic in the technical press these days. If the intent is both to update RFC 9325 and provide broader guidance, it might be helpful to clarify this in the introduction or abstract. I believe it cleanly updates 9325 and gives reasons for doing so. Also, have you had a chance to review the suggestions made by Med in the following PR? GitHub Link<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/richsalz/draft-use-tls13/pull/6/files__;!!GjvTz_vk!RfdPF6WxjEEjlm25JC7js_6GUIFsuoPGmPyuUDGtweXvNQJyPoeIbUEKrDdJFNirEHVzJWLUz00AjvtJYq1CcW0$>. Yes I have seen it, and I commented in the PR that I will merge it shortly.
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list -- uta@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to uta-le...@ietf.org
