IETF Logo Mail Archive

[TLS] Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison communication to IETF regarding draft-ietf-tls-mlkem"

Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> Wed, 08 April 2026 04:10 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC7E1D7DF21F for <tls@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Apr 2026 21:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1775621413; bh=ICoJ/vcq1OauE+gAIOdc8doldegPioPdD/iWivWRPZo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To; b=yHB3F0ncvWIhP5+Ga68XBktl0E5fMbd1hVSusF/LoVEXTAAN/815HQ2Ktvhm7kEMm OWx502EzcVXRFGcjdk6t7kHkK9jMmF1iD4aHnfjuqbXsnaYlhxuEdo4aH4LzPbHeZJ iqCFbt1/NScxKuHzpHI7Edet3e4G5k6mk7i188P0=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dukhovni.org
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bjtWPaCi-Hbo for <tls@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Apr 2026 21:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chardros.imrryr.org (chardros.imrryr.org [144.6.86.210]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53348D7DF219 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Apr 2026 21:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dukhovni.org; i=@dukhovni.org; q=dns/txt; s=f8320d6e; t=1775621410; h=date : from : to : subject : message-id : reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to : content-transfer-encoding : from; bh=ICoJ/vcq1OauE+gAIOdc8doldegPioPdD/iWivWRPZo=; b=yisjsIwgcqvttu9wAVN+cBnL4xBdvVWfRVmZ2N8I7ZVk6G3dg77qKLd8ahBZ8inFXZT4f 5NVD30jr2XCn/7NNj9HKOgg427Uep0oWLTdlcfA+sOKXMtEwc147yPQKADALnHO/fOvm1ED jw5f/P1tWPLcfCG6mDes+Jh7yNde4OU=
Received: by chardros.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 16950937704; Wed, 08 Apr 2026 14:10:10 +1000 (AEST)
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2026 14:10:09 +1000
From: Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
To: tls@ietf.org
Message-ID: <adXVIdmIOG8SonlM@chardros.imrryr.org>
References: <CAF8qwaBcotZqOnY2qJ6d0fRoa=5v0sZTOSWqeqkou+bLJcy9LA@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPr+WeivTWpSCVC4f95fRuSiOytvvBPB_6r+af9Didhgw@mail.gmail.com> <CEB84168-5998-432A-9D62-36E28B9CDFA5@vigilsec.com> <CABcZeBM-eoqh+kJ7H6SiwC9p4tKAt+YiQhzetJZJmPNpXc+5OA@mail.gmail.com> <CAF8qwaALDXR6d=jLD46wXmKHDjyj=OdJ1X3a1AgxF+ByQceeMg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBO0ysBjtbiPuSboP4fAATuVHQxq1TA5TbQ+_Oy-NrET0g@mail.gmail.com> <7A4F9775-8929-469D-B454-B027A0BAFA69@vigilsec.com> <CABcZeBPk3fdfPw=S_f5v2E9Y1LUfQL8f6sKvTYG0R6qRHm6rgg@mail.gmail.com> <b1527204-149e-6979-a344-8d530613e979@nohats.ca> <24a09e13-ad76-4af2-9e2c-27f1c2282b02@cs.tcd.ie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <24a09e13-ad76-4af2-9e2c-27f1c2282b02@cs.tcd.ie>
Mail-Followup-To: <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: VCTUJBWXP2I6635AGLEUFAQB6QBYCVDR
X-Message-ID-Hash: VCTUJBWXP2I6635AGLEUFAQB6QBYCVDR
X-MailFrom: ietf-dane@dukhovni.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tls@ietf.org
Subject: [TLS] Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison communication to IETF regarding draft-ietf-tls-mlkem"
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/rMbFF3tVd49FaJOXp35dU6xg03U>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tls-leave@ietf.org>

On Wed, Apr 08, 2026 at 12:21:43AM +0100, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> On 07/04/2026 21:35, Paul Wouters wrote:
> > 
> > The contention is whether it should be published now or later, when
> > classic protections gain us little to no benefit.
> 
> From my POV, that mischaracterises the contention. I think
> the contentious issue is whether or not to publish this with
> or without caveats as to when to use it, and how to encode
> any such caveats in RFC/BCP text.

I haven't seen any objections to publishing with caveats, only
lack of clarity as to whether that'd be sufficient to lay this
to rest.

-- 
    Viktor.  🇺🇦 Слава Україні!

v2.40.4 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status