[saag] Re: post quantum guidance draft

Stephen Farrell <[email protected]> Mon, 1 Dec 2025 15:01:14 +0000

Newsgroups	gmane.ietf.saag
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hiya,

On 01/12/2025 14:44, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Yes, I think we should provide guidance, but this draft is the wrong
> way to do it. Rather, we should provide guidance in the protocols
> themselves, which is not inconsistent with registering a lot of code
> points (hence tools like "recommended=Y/N").

That's implementer guidance and I'm not really sure that
IANA column thing is that effective as a tool TBH. More
guidance from specific WGs would be good though, but likely
slow in arriving, and patchy.

> Moreover, this proposal doesn't even really do that good a job of
> narrowing the set of algorithms for key establishment, because it
> just says "use hybrids" but of course there can be a large number of
> hybrids, because there are a fair number of PQ KEM algorithms and
> the product of those algorithms with EC groups is even larger.

I'd be entirely happy if my draft said to use a combination of
X25519 and ML-KEM 768 wherever you can. I did think about doing
that, but figured that'd be a detail to address later if the
thing goes somewhere.

Cheers,
S.

_______________________________________________
saag mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

OpenPGP_signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 236 B)