[openpgp] Re: PQC: Proposed Standard or Informational?

Andrew Gallagher <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.openpgp
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 17 Jun 2025, at 01:28, Heiko Schäfer <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The "Proposed Standard" designation sounds appropriate and desirable to me.

Agreed, especially when we consider that one of the secondary goals of this draft is that it should serve as a template for future PQC algorithms. It would seem strange for such a template to be merely Informational.

A

_______________________________________________
openpgp mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=l8iO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.