[TLS] Re: Working Group Last Call for Use of ML-DSA in TLS 1.3

[David Benjamin <[e-mail]>]

I think we are saying the same thing. I am saying that it should reference
the complete signature algorithm definitions, i.e. the SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM
objects.  Specifically, this draft needs to cite the ones for ML-DSA, which
are defined in RFC 9881, i.e. MLDSACERTS.

I was *replying* to a message which suggested that the TLS document repeat
the parameter definition. It sounds like you and I agree that the TLS
document should instead cite the existing complete definition.

On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 3:16 PM Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi David -
>
> That doesn't quite work.  What you're looking for here are the names of
> the SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM  declarations (which are bound to those OID
> identifiers) not the OID declarations.  Those are in the MLDSACERTS
> document.  Import/use sa-ml-dsa-* instead of id-ml-dsa-* and omit the OID
> definitions (or note them in a different column for reference).   The
> SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM declarations already say that the parameters field is
> omitted for each of these three declarations.
>
> The AlgorithmIdentifier column should reference
> SignatureAlgorithmIdentifier from RFC 5911 vice AlgorithmIdentifier.  The
> MLDSACERTS document expands the definition of SignatureAlgorithmIdentifier
> properly to include the ML DSA signatures.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On 4/10/2026 11:35, David Benjamin wrote:
>
> Ah, good call. Though I'd suggest we just instead cite RFC 9881, which
> defines the OID and params together, rather than duplicate the definition.
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 11:33 AM Corey Bonnell <Corey.Bonnell=
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> I read the document and support publication.
>>
>> A nit on the use of "AlgorithmIdentifier" in the document:
>> AlgorithmIdentifier
>> is an ASN.1 SEQUENCE of an "algorithm" OID field and an optional
>> "parameters"
>> field. To fully specify the AlgorithmIdentifier for each of the three
>> parameter sets, it's also necessary to specify that the "parameters"
>> field
>> must be absent. I suggest modifying Table 1 to explicitly state that
>> "parameters" are absent.
>>
>> If that's unpalatable, then I suggest changing all instances of
>> "AlgorithmIdentifier" to "algorithm identifier".
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Corey
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sean Turner <[e-mail]>
>> Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2026 3:30 PM
>> To: TLS List <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for Use of ML-DSA in TLS 1.3
>>
>> This is the working group last call for Use of ML-DSA in TLS 1.3. Please
>> review draft-ietf-tls-mldsa [1] and reply to this thread indicating if
>> you
>> think it is ready for publication or not. If you do not think it is ready
>> please indicate why. This call will end on April 23, 2026.
>>
>> REMINDER: If you have not done so recently, review the TLS WG's Mail List
>> Procedures; see [2].
>>
>> The Chairs,
>> Deirdre, Joe, and Sean
>>
>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-mldsa/
>> [2]
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/ucdImHExlbOf4Q3BCG81gjzi2xE/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>> _______________________________________________
>> TLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>