Hi Thomas, Thank you.
All addressed in https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-05&url2=draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-06&difftype=--html Ready for the next step. -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Fossati via Datatracker <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2025 9:26 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Ssh] draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-05 ietf last call Genart review CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. Document: draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex Title: PQ/T Hybrid Key Exchange with ML-KEM in SSH Reviewer: Thomas Fossati Review result: Ready with Nits I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>. Document: draft-ietf-sshm-mlkem-hybrid-kex-?? Reviewer: Thomas Fossati Review Date: 2025-12-17 IETF LC End Date: 2026-01-01 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: This is a clear and well-written document that defines three hybrid KEMs for use in SSH, which use the ML-KEM algorithm. The protocol mechanics are described in detail. The document is concise yet very informative. This reviewer found it an enjoyable read; thank you, editors. There are no issues from a Gen-ART perspective, and it is ready (with nits; see below). Major issues: none Minor issues: none Nits/editorial comments: * s/cause a packet to exceed/causes a packet to exceed/ * s/depends on the availability/depend on the availability/ * s/each individual/each/ * s/C_PK1, S_PK1, C_PK2, S_CT2/C_PK1, S_PK1, C_PK2 and S_CT2/ * s/to the client public key/to the client's public key/ * ยง6 at the end of the second paragraph, perhaps add the usual reference to RFC4086; e.g.: "See also {{?RFC4086}} for guidance in this area." Note: There are a few missing commas here and there. I am not sure what conventions the RPC uses, so I will refrain from adding noise. _______________________________________________ Ssh mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
