Nick Sullivan <[email protected]> writes: > I support publication of this draft. > > Some of the feedback in the thread appears to treat this last call as if > the document were intended to be published as an Internet Standard. It is > not. The intended RFC status is Informational, and the IANA actions > allocate code points for reference and interoperability/testing, not as a > WG recommendation for TLS deployments (Recommended: N).
There is another perspective: it is requested to publish this through the TLS WG. The document doesn't have to be published by the TLS WG. Using the TLS WG's time on a document with (at best) unclear benefit to Internet security is a waste of resources, and sends the message that the TLS WG welcome contributions to promote the needs of intelligence agencies. Alas, that is already somewhat established by adopting this. I support publishing this as a RFC Editor submission or some other publication venue. It has been suggested to allocate IANA code points based on I-D drafts alone. Treat pure PQ as the same class of submissions as SM3, GOST, Brainpool or other vanity registrations. But don't pretend the TLS WG believe this will improve the Internet. /Simon > If the WG wants to separately discuss recommending this code point for TLS > implementers, that is worth a thorough discussion. But that question should > be kept separate from whether to publish this Informational document, which > is the focus of this last call thread. > Nick > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 2:06 PM Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This message starts the second Working Group Last Call for the pure ML-KEM >> document (draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-07). >> >> >> The file can be retrieved from: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-mlkem/ >> >> The diff with the previous WGLC draft (-05) is here: >> >> >> >> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-05&url2=draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-07&difftype=--html >> <https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-05&url2=draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-06&difftype=--html> >> >> >> The main focus of this WGLC is to review new text providing more context >> around the use of pure ML-KEM. For those who indicated they wanted this >> text, please let us know if the new text satisfies you and if you support >> publication. This working group last call will end on February 27, 2026. >> >> >> Thank You. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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] >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
