[saag] Re: [Ext] Re: draft-paulwh-crypto-components-02
"D. J. Bernstein" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.saag |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Paul Wouters writes: > The recent past (eg non-pq) shows a narrowing of algorithms to mostly > be 1 NIST and 1 non-NIST algorithm. Shouldn't this sort of claim be backed by a verifiable list of examples and counterexamples? When a draft claims to describe "the history of how cryptographic components have been documented and referenced in the IETF, particularly in RFCs", shouldn't the draft already have this list? ---D. J. Bernstein _______________________________________________ saag mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]