[TLS] Re: draft-connolly-tls-mlkem-key-agreement

[Loganaden Velvindron <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 at 12:00, Viktor Dukhovni <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 08:24:24PM -0800, Joseph Salowey wrote:
>
> > You continue to violate list policy with unprofessional commentary on other
> > participants' motivations and repeatedly raising points that are out of
> > scope.  Please stop this behavior.  This is the last warning before we will
> > take action and temporarily ban you from the list; see BCP 94 [0].
> >
> > [0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3934
>
> I personally find this threat excessive under the circumstances, however
> forceful, or insistent on being heard, Dan may be at times, history has
> shown that he is often enough ultimately proved right, years or decades
> later.  However "inconvenient", IMHO his voice should not be suppressed.
>
> If his strong view is that pure PQ KEMs (probably not just
> ML-KEM/Kyber), are too novel to be responsibly relied on without a
> classical fallback, then he should IMHO able to forcefully make that
> case.
>
I also think that this escalated quickly. I would suggest a peaceful resolution
is found off-list around beer, good food and a nice and quiet beach :-)

Maybe TLS WG needs to do an interim meeting in Mauritius to solve
thorny issues  :-)