[saag] Re: post quantum guidance draft

On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 8:32 AM Nico Williams <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 06:44:51AM -0800, 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").
>
> We can have cross-area advice.  That is effectively what CFRG does.  Can
> you say more about why we shouldn't do that in this specific case?
>

I think the right advice is going to depend quite a bit on the specific
use case, especially for signatures. It's possible that something
sufficiently nuanced could be produced, but I think it would take
the form of considerations that could then be applied in individual
contexts, rather than the kind of broad brush advice in this
draft.


-Ekr

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