[TLS] Re: [EXT] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-05 (Ends 2025-11-26)

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 10/11/2025 16:26, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
> Except for a few dissenters who absolutely can’t accept that 
> somebody else may use pure mlkem1024.

I'm quite fine with being classified as a dissenter:-) (*)

Aside from the quote above I assume being intended as a pejorative,
that doesn't I think capture at least my objection to this draft
as-is.

I think we ought not publish this without some guidance for those
who are deploying now/soon. I think (as per [1]) that we should
provide guidance that will encourage interop and security, and this
draft does not currently do that, instead it (IMO) encourages a
lack of interop and use of perhaps more risky implementations.

Cheers,
S.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farrell-tls-pqg/

(*) The term dissenter has a history where I'm from where it's a
more-or-less positive term if you read the 18th century history
and factor out the mythology, religion, secret-societies and
violence around e.g. Wolfe Tone and the united Irishmen. I don't
know if someone's tried to map 18th century revolutions to our
current situation of corporate dominance, but I bet it could be
(and probably has been) done:-)