| ▲ | tptacek a day ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
These are arguments, but I don't really understand what they're arguments for. At issue here is whether or not the IETF should document usage of pure-MLKEM TLS. There are environments where people are going to use pure-MLKEM TLS, whether Bernstein likes it or not. His argument is that the IETF should pretend that isn't happening, and throw up weird procedural obstacles to it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | chrismorgan a day ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
I know approximately nothing about the specific case here, and don’t believe I have any skin in the game. I intended my comment purely abstractly: I’m not commenting on anything technical, merely mentioning a procedural concern: that the line I quoted can sound reasonable, but that I don’t think it’s actually a reasonable argument by itself, because of the likely consequences of such actions. (That is: if that happened to be the only argument—though I doubt it is—there’s a compelling case for rejecting it.) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | g-b-r a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
If it's documented it will be implemented by many more libraries and applications, that's the argument | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | rasengan a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
[flagged] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||