[saag] Re: [Ext] Re: draft-paulwh-crypto-components-02
Paul Wouters <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.saag |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> On Feb 14, 2025, at 10:00, D. J. Bernstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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? I do not believe so as i thought it was obvious. > 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? The previous document did so and most people thought it was a distraction. So it was changed to something that mostly explains that the past is full of inconsistencies and that individual past decisions shouldn't be blindly used to justify future decisions and that instead we should aim at more consistent policies. Paul _______________________________________________ saag mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]