[TLS] Re: MLKEM Consensus Call (was WG Last Call: draft- ietf-tls-mlkem-08 (Ends 2026-07-08))

Dear Fabiana,

Am Sonntag, dem 19.07.2026 um 13:55 +0000 schrieb DA PIEVE Fabiana:
> Can I kindly ask if there is evidence that can be provided for your
> statements about the numbers, and more info on the weights / method
> you apply to weigh answers, from both sides ?
> 
> I imagine you have a table/a scheme/something, with participants, an
> established method for the weights, weights associated to each person
> on both sides, other elements you may have considered relevant ....

I hope, this list (if existing) keeps disclosed. Even if Joe (having my
deepest respect for moderating this list and advancing the discussion
to an end) provides such a list, it probably will fail to correctly
attribute the different oppinions to put into the forseen jars. 
For instance, my analysis can be found here [1], check item 6; but in
particular this does not tell, that I am an opponent of the original
draft.

At the bottom line: It is irrelevant. 

While working with TLS (for my users, including public organizations
and federal states here in Germany which depended on my SW) over the
last > 25 years, for me it is important to provide the highest
achievable level of security/confidentiality for those.

Given the proposed solution with the addendum of Joe, I like to comment
the following:

* The risk mitigation taken (given the PRNG) relies on paper-work only.
* The risk mitigation does not necessarily require an implementation
(though possible, cheap, and easy).

Since I'm known for my bad analogies (limping), I would like to add
another one [2]. A lot of people here have my age and are veterans of
the Internet (Eric, Rich, and many other from whom I profited quite a
lot in my SW - thanks to those; and including Deb - for her I apologize
any unqualified assertations) and will share those memories. This was
the trigger of my following mail [3] because the NASA left no choices
for the astronaut crew; though possible with low chances. The result is
known.

Engineers will not only talk about problems, but rather solve those for
critical missions. And this has nothing to do in what camp you are.

Regards.
--eh.

PS: I can live with the draft version of Joe, but this is the second-
best solution.

PPS: I will shut my mouth now and go back to work (Joe).


[1]
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/Q-ZAH0cyd6vM1iG0QreHDtan0dg/
[2]
https://nicholastoole.wordpress.ncsu.edu/disaster-archive-case-study/columbia-space-shuttle-disaster-and-powerpoint/
[3]
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/w3QCc4vdUV8E1BUNum5hm1EBc8w/

-- 
Dr. Erwin Hoffmann | www.fehcom.de
PGP key-id: 36553F7F9C58D1CC
PGP key-fingerprint:  950B 5555 0B08 5A2A 1C00 9594 3655 3F7F 9C58 D1CC

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iIQEABYKACwWIQSVC1VVCwhaKhwAlZQ2VT9/nFjRzAUCal1Vmg4cZmVoQGZlaGNv
bS5kZQAKCRA2VT9/nFjRzMIiAQDS9eOd8KMLWjpkXir5YlCjQvEOtGW0bgItashZ
tTSssgEAtsZxXyLhKncXqoA6v5RU7hwhRPuRZlURy4B+M/NwAA0=
=AEDF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----