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

[Loganaden Velvindron <[e-mail]>]

I support publication

On Fri, 10 Apr 2026, 15:27 Bas Westerbaan, <bas=
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> In contrast to KEMs, IMO the guidance for signatures in TLS
>> would be to just not deploy them for now, but only to do
>> experiments in case this is needed in future.
>>
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> Last year I'd have agreed with you mostly. Perhaps asking for deployment,
> but not being used by default. Indeed: there is always a big gap between a
> small scale experiment and actual deployment.
>
> But now I don't think we have that much time left, and now is the moment
> to deploy PQ signatures. https://blog.cloudflare.com/post-quantum-roadmap
>
> You might disagree. That shouldn't affect this document: it does not
> advise to deploy PQ signatures. Indeed RECOMMENDED=N. When I first wrote
> the document it was to get agreement on the few wire details to be able to
> move forward with initial experimental testing.
>
>
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> S.
>>
>> >
>> > 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]
>