[Ssh] Re: cipher documentation

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 7:53 AM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 7:00 AM Simon Josefsson <simon=
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>> In particular the last paragraph:
>>
>>    There is a desire for the WG to only publish standards track
>>    documents which there is broad support for among key implementers of
>>    the SSH protocol, and if such broad consensus cannot be reached then
>>    the WG will concluded without standards track publications.
>>
>> That does not rule an informational document (such as sntrup761x25519)
>> out of scope, but it would limit the WG from producing standards track
>> documents to those which are widely implemented.  Does anyone remember
>> when IETF was about running code?
>>
>
>
> I'm not sure I follow what you're trying to do with this text. As a
> reference, the proposed charter text says"
>
> "This working group will strive for strong security, simplicity, and ease
> of implementation. In particular, proposals should only be adopted if there
> is evidence of significant existing deployment or broad interest in new
> implementation and deployment."
>
> Your proposed text seems to have two major differences here:
>
> * Broad support from "key implementors" in place of "evidence of ... broad
> interest"
> I think your text is inferior here, as it's difficult to define "key
> implementors" and the proposed text captures the notion that there should
> be broad buyin.
>
> * Limiting the requirement for broad support to standards track documents
> rather than informational documents.
> It seems like this would allow for informational documents even when there
> wasn't broad support. This seems contrary to the idea that we ought to be
> listening to the SSH community, as presumably if the SSH community is in
> favor of something there will be "broad interest in new deployment".
>

... or "significant existing deployment"

>
> -Ekr
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>