On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:48 AM Ilari Liusvaara <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 08:30:44AM -0500, Orie Steele wrote: > > This seems good to me. > > > > We had planned to request registry entries for JOSE algorithms that match > > the COSE algorithms for: > > > > - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-dilithium/ > > - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-falcon/ > > - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-sphincs-plus/ > > > > Seems like there might be some overlap in objectives, aside from updating > > test vectors, one of the most recent changes we have made was to update > the > > kty values to "MLWE". > > ... seems like perhaps we should align to the latest NIST terminology? > > Naming is hard. > > All three should use the same kty value, because all three have the same > kind of keys, and kty actually means the kind of key. The kty will be a > new one, because it is not the same as any existing kind. My earlier > proposal for the name was "AKP". > > > As long as the algorithm is fully specified, I am not strongly opinionated on kty. What does AKP stand for? Do you support the maintenance extensions to the charter? > > > -Ilari > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose > -- ORIE STEELE Chief Technology Officer www.transmute.industries <https://transmute.industries>
_______________________________________________ jose mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
