On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 10:13 AM Robert Relyea <rrelyea= [email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/13/25 6:10 AM, Dennis Jackson wrote: > > I support publication. > > > > I don't have strong feelings on which recommended bits are set, but > > either X25519MLKEM768 alone, or all three, would make the most sense > > to me. > > > > I don't think any other changes are warranted. Any additional choices > > should be handled by a different document. > > I also support publication. I'm fine with any setting in the recommended > bits. I would prefer that the NIST curves not be removed. > > The fact is what every IETF decides, our products will almost certainly > implement X25519MLKEM768 as preferred and default, and implement the > other two groups as optional and our customers will chose based on their > business and certification requirements. > Your regular reminder to all (I know Bob knows this!) that the code points are already assigned, so even if IETF removed these groups and never published a new document defining them, they would still be implementable. -Ekr > bob > > > > > On 07/10/2025 14:46, Joseph Salowey wrote: > >> This is the working group last call for Post-quantum hybrid > >> ECDHE-MLKEM Key Agreement for TLSv1.3. Please review > >> draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-mlkem [1] and reply to this thread indicating if > >> you think it is ready for publication or not. If you do not think it > >> is ready please indicate why. This call will end on October 22, 2025. > >> > >> Please note that during the WG adoption call, Dan Bernstein pointed > >> out some potential IPR (see [2]), but no IPR disclosure has been made > >> in accordance with BCP 79. Additional information is provided here; > >> see [3]. > >> > >> BCP 79 makes this important point: > >> > >> (b) The IETF, following normal processes, can decide to use > >> technology for which IPR disclosures have been made if it decides > >> that such a use is warranted. > >> > >> WG members can take this information into account during the working > >> group last call. > >> > >> Reminder: This working group last call has nothing to do with > >> picking the mandatory-to-implement cipher suites in TLS. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Joe & Sean > >> > >> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-mlkem/ > >> [2] > >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/mt4_p95NZv8duZIJvJPdZV90-ZU/ > >> [3] > >> > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/GKFhHfBeCgf8hQQvhUcyOJ6M-kI/ > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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] > > > _______________________________________________ > 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]
