[saag] Re: [Ext] draft-paulwh-crypto-components-02

On Feb 14, 2025, at 02:47, Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> writes:
> 
>>> The distinction I am trying to draw here is that if you have an
>>> Informational document describing a protocol it's reasonable for it
>>> to use normative language that applies to those who implement the
>>> protocol. However, I would prefer we not have Informational
>>> documents that impose normative requirements on other protocols,
>>> etc.
>> 
>> Is there wording in the current draft that feels like it imposes
>> normative requirements on other protocols. We tried to suggest rather
>> than demand, but if we missed, it would be good to fix.
> 
> The way I read the paragraph below is that you intend a normative
> requirement but you re-worded it to actually not say so overtly.  I also
> think the broad generic argument below that "too many algorithms is
> harmful" plays too strongly in the hands of those who want to make
> non-NIST crypto hard to deploy.

Agree on both parts. Will fix.

--Paul Hoffman

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