On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 01:40:42PM +1100, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 05:36:32PM -0800, Watson Ladd wrote: > > > Publishing the draft simple means "If you must do this, this is how". > > > > The codepoint registration is all you need for that. > > Sure, but a published RFC signals that the specification is finally > stable enough to publish the final versioned I-D as an RFC.
Eh, the codepoint comes from a part of the namespace that is Specification Required. The current specification is listed as draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement-05. If the I-D is never published and the authors do not change the registration, then whatever the last registered specification is is the stable one, and presumably that ought to be good enough to produce interoperable implementations. That said, I also support publication on the grounds that 'the ship has sailed' and it targeting Informational is 'good enough', and given that I'd rather have a document that received WG, IETF, and IESG review than one that didn't. Though I would prefer this be published as Experimental. Nico -- _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
