On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 11:53 AM Daniel Apon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am aware there was a recent "mandatory call" for pure-mlkem that > recently failed. It might surprise those who know me to hear that I agree > with that mandatory call failing. I do not think it's the proper time for > pure-mlkem to be mandatory. > This is not correct. There was never a call for pure ML-KEM to be mandatory, or, for that matter, even recommended. The call was for consensus on requesting publication of the document. > So, my general call is for the following: > 1) Adopt hybrid-ECC-MLKEM for TLS 1.3 > This has already happened. In fact, the WG has requested publication of this document. > 2) Adopt ML-KEM-only for TLS 1.3 > This has also already happened. The discussion on the table is whether to request publication of this document in its current optional state. That is also the context of the upcoming call mentioned by the chairs. -Ekr
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
