[MLS] Re: MLS re-charter & extensions

[Rohan Mahy <[e-mail]>]

Yes, I abandoned membership proof.

There are also the postquantum ciphersuites, (both pure ML-KEM and hybrid
with P256, P384, and X25519), which depend on HPKE KEM definitions. There
is a solid draft for pure ML-KEM HPKE.

I will have another MLS credential based on draft-ietf-spice-sd-cwt
(selective disclosure CBOR Web Tokens)

I'm assuming we don't need to include the extensions already in
draft-ietf-mls-extensions?

Thanks,

-rohan



On Sat, Oct 26, 2024, 07:52 Raphael Robert <ietf=
[e-mail]> wrote:

> This extensions is missing:
>
>  - Virtual Clients
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kohbrok-mls-virtual-clients/
>
> These extensions might be abandoned:
>
>  - A membership proof extensions for the Messaging Layer Security (MLS)
> Protocol
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mahy-mls-member-proof/
>
> I think we discussed this and came to the conclusion it’s obsolete – Rohan
> please correct me if I'm wrong
>
>  - Paired MLS - PCS in Limited Modes
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fondevik-mls-pairedmls/
>
> Unsure about the status, no activity in 10 months – Britta please clarify
> the status
>
> Raphael
>
> On 25. Oct 2024, at 20:17, Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Okay so the list I know about (in no particular order) follows. Are any of
> these abandoned?
>
> - Flexible Hybrid PQ MLS Combiner
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hale-mls-combiner
>
> - Light MLS
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kiefer-mls-light
>
> - Split Commits
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mularczyk-mls-splitcommit
>
> - Multi-Device MLS
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mcmillion-mls-subgroups
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kohbrok-mls-virtual-clients
>
> - MLS Associated parties
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kohbrok-mls-associated-parties
>
> - Efficient Updates to Messaging Layer Security GroupContext Extension
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mahy-mls-gce
>
> - MLS Wire Formats for PublicMessage and PrivateMessage without
> authenticated_data
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pham-mls-additional-wire-formats/
>
> - Ways to convey the Ratchet Tree in Messaging Layer Security
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mahy-mls-ratchet-tree-options/
>
> - Semi-Private Messages in the Messaging Layer Security (MLS) Protocol
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mahy-mls-semiprivatemessage/
>
> - The MLS Replace Proposal
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-replace/
>
> - Using Messaging Layer Security to Synchronize Application State
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-appsync/
>
> - A membership proof extensions for the Messaging Layer Security (MLS)
> Protocol
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mahy-mls-member-proof/
>
> - Paired MLS - PCS in Limited Modes
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fondevik-mls-pairedmls/
>
> spt
>
> On Oct 16, 2024, at 23:18, Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi! I don’t want to jinx myself here, but it looks like the MLS re-charter
> should be approved tomorrow (17 October).  The re-charter was done to
> support working on MLS extensions.  Can we start to collect a list and
> decide which ones ought to go in mls-extensions?
>
> spt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>