[saag] Re: post quantum guidance draft

> I'm actually not convinced that the proliferation of entries in the
registries is a significant interop problem. I agree that the IETF should
only recommend a small number of these,
but as I said, I think that's a problem for WGs.

Same

On Mon, Dec 1, 2025, 11:52 AM Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 8:44 AM Stephen Farrell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 01/12/2025 16:16, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>> > I would suggest that a better way to do
>> > that would be to try to get to some consensus about whether there
>> > is in fact a problem that needs to be solved and what that problem is,
>>
>> Yeah, I guess that's why I was puzzled. I think it's obvious
>> what the problem is (and that's even described in the draft).
>>
> I guess someone could claim that the zoo of PQ codepoints we
>> can't stop ourselves adding to registries won't damage interop
>> but I don't find that at all convincing.
>>
>
> I'm actually not convinced that the proliferation of entries
> in the registries is a significant interop problem. I agree that
> the IETF should only recommend a small number of these,
> but as I said, I think that's a problem for WGs.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> saag mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>

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