On Mon, 23 Feb 2026, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
Okay, but in that case, we should expect that there will be a serious effort to move hybrids to Recommended=Y some time this year, right? This is strongly implied by the AD’s remarks, and leaving them as Recommended=N makes absolutely no sense, especially if you also want to pass their complete opposite as Recommended=N.
Experience showed that all argumentation of Recommended= includes comparing one algorithm to another algorithm and thus handling this in each draft would be impossible to do, unless you'd let all drafts wait on each other. We saw this also leading to issues recently in the SSHM WG. Instead, let all drafts go out with Recommended=N, then work on one draft that sets the new Recommended= values for the recent drafts, along with perhaps setting some Recommended=D for older RFCs. This way, a single draft can explain the various reasoning and do the comparing of different algorithms in one draft. For successfull examples of this strategy, see RFC 4307, RFC 8247, RFC 8221, RFC 8624 and RFC 9904. It also makes writing a bis document of such a document cleaner, as can be seen by 9904 only obsoleting 8624 and 8247 obsoleting 4307, and 9904 obsoleting 8624. If you put those recommendations only in the per-algorithm draft, you cannot obsolete those RFCs, leading to possible confusion of RFC vs IANA registry saying different things. Paul _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
