[TLS] Re: [EXT] Re: WG Adoption Call for ML-KEM Post-Quantum Key Agreement for TLS 1.3

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 17/04/2025 18:56, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
> One reason hybrids add risks is the practical implementation/
> deployment/processes/management/maintenance part, as opposed to
> treating the issue as a pure mathematical formula - which deployed
> software apparently is not (some might argue that it should be, I
> let the reality speak for itself).

I'm relatively confident that the set of implementations that only
do pure-PQ and don't do hybrid will be so small as to make the
above an unconvincing argument.

> Since It looks like 3/4 of the audience holds position similar to
> mine - frankly, I don’t see why 3/4 must convince 1/4 that their
> position is valid (usually, it’s the other way around).

You are conflating the set of positions of all those who wanted to
adopt the draft with your own position. The two likely differ.

Cheers,
S.

PS: Yes it can get tedious dealing with others' arguments. But that's
what's needed generally even if it takes a while to understand what
other people mean.