[saag] Re: [EXTERNAL] post quantum guidance draft

"Dang, Quynh H. \(Fed\)" <[email protected]> Wed, 3 Dec 2025 15:13:57 +0000
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.saag
Message-ID <MW4PR09MB1005902D0FA396BF563D42BF1F3D9A@MW4PR09MB10059.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Stephen,

Opinions only have values when the answers are not known. 

I think the community knows the pros and cons of hybrid vs pure PQC, so the answers are known (I am not talking about "here is a paper which says the cost is 1 cent, x amount of energy or time only; so this is more important than that etc. which is an opinion). 

You could write a document which lists the pros and cons, let the users decide.  PQUIP would be a better place than SAAG I think. 

Regards,
Quynh. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Farrell <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 7:36 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [saag] post quantum guidance draft
> 
> 
> Hiya,
> 
> We chatted a bit about [1] at the secdispatch session in Montreal and the sort-of
> outcome was that further discussion should be on this list. I've updated [1] a
> little bit in the meantime.
> 
> I heard various reactions to [1] at secdispatch and in subsequent chats with a
> few people, those included:
> 
> 1. we need something like this (maybe this text or some
>     other, but some general guidance is needed) 2. we don't need this, specific
> WGs should provide whatever
>     guidance is needed, if any
> 3. we shouldn't bother with this at all, it's just a waste
>     of time and will go nowhere
> 
> There are likely other positions on this too of course.
> 
> Given that we've probably hit 100 new PQ codepoints over the various IANA
> registries (anyone counted 'em all?), I'm clearly in favour of #1 above. #2 seems
> likely to make for more confusion and be quite slow, and while #3 might turn
> out to be the case, I think we owe it to people using our stuff to give it a shot.
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> PS: For those who don't read the draft:-) It doesn't say anything about what
> WGs should do, it's only about what people deploying stuff ought do in the
> near term.
> 
> [1]
> https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatrack
> er.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-farrell-tls-
> pqg%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cquynh.dang%40nist.gov%7Cb47c1b11c4c04cdb8
> b9908de30d66e4f%7C2ab5d82fd8fa4797a93e054655c61dec%7C0%7C0%7C
> 639001894727986388%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiO
> nRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ
> %3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wIxTk8BsCuyD1F%2Fz67MjfvtwiOoPVp5B9
> y9XzG1Q0do%3D&reserved=0

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