I hope the TLS WG Chairs take this to heart-- while the ask to-date has been for people to simply provide statements "I support" or "I oppose" publication, we seem solidly in a flavor of the worst-case scenario of RFC 7282, where people have been recruited from a social media campaign to "stuff the ballot box," regardless of whether they have contributed meaningfully to PQC research for the past 15 years or not.
Kind regards, --Daniel On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 7:07 PM Daniel Apon <[email protected]> wrote: > [image: image.png] > > I cite: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7282#section-7 > > On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 5:10 PM Charles Cazabon <charlesc-ietf.org= > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL <[email protected]> wrote: >> > There is some disagreement, but the credible cryptographers - except >> one - >> > do support the publication. >> >> "No true Scotsman" >> >> Charles >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Charles Cazabon <[email protected]> >> Software, consulting, and services available at http://pyropus.ca/ >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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]
