[TLS] Re: WG Adoption Call for Use of ML-DSA in TLS 1.3

[Andrey Jivsov <[e-mail]>]

I don't think that standalone ML-DSA should be adopted.

There is time to move to a non-hybrid X.509 and digital signatures in the
future.

This topic has implications to availability of X.509 certificates, as there
is a real risk that CAs will prefer standalone ML-DSA to ethe exclusion of
hybrids, and also that other protocols will be limited to standalone ML-DSA.

On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:39 AM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I do not think we should adopt this draft at this time. I would prefer the
> WG focus its effort on key establishment.
> Once those documents are complete, we can reconsider signature.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:34 AM Sean Turner <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> We are continuing with our WG adoption calls for the following I-D:
>> Use of ML-DSA in TLS 1.3 [1]; see [2] for more information about this
>> tranche of adoption calls. If you support adoption and are willing to
>> review and contribute text, please send a message to the list. If you do
>> not support adoption of this draft, please send a message to the list and
>> indicate why. This call will close at 2359 UTC on 29 April 2025.
>>
>> Reminder:  This call for adoption has nothing to do with picking the
>> mandatory-to-implement cipher suites in TLS.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Joe and Sean
>>
>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tls-westerbaan-mldsa/
>> [2]
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/KMOTm_lE5OIAKG8_chDlRKuav7c/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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]
>