John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke-10: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for this. I have just one comment, about what's probably just a typographical error but it interfered with my understanding of the point in question so it seemed worth mentioning. ### Section 2, (2) is missing a verb, but what verb? ``` Hybrid. Currently, there does not exist a post-quantum key exchange that is trusted at the level that (EC)DH is trusted against conventional (non-quantum) adversaries. A hybrid post-quantum algorithm to be introduced next to well-established primitives, since the overall security is at least as strong as each individual primitive. ``` The second sentence seems, at minimum, to be missing a verb. For instance you could interpolate "needs" between "algorithm" and "to be", but I'm not sure if that properly captures your intended meaning. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
