Yes, that’s just fine — sorry for the duplicate effort, I hadn’t noticed Paul’s comment.
—John > On Nov 30, 2022, at 6:18 PM, CJ Tjhai <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi John, > > I've just realised that Paul Wouters has also commented on the same sentence > and he has suggested the following: > > A hybrid post-quantum algorithm to be introduced along with > the well-established primitives addresses this concern, since the overall > security is at least as strong as each individual primitive. > > This has been committed into our latest PR. Hope this works with you. > > Cheers, > CJ > > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 23:11, CJ Tjhai <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi John, > > Many thanks for your review. Please see the response inline below. > > Best wishes, > CJ > > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 20:56, John Scudder via Datatracker <[email protected]> > wrote: > John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-multiple-ke-10: No Objection > > > > [snipped] > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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. > > I see your point, perhaps we should rephrase the sentence to the following: > > Combining a post-quantum algorithm next to well-established primitives > in a hybrid arrangement, would alleviate this concern since the overall > security > is at least as strong as each individual primitive. > > Would this work with you? > > PQ Solutions Limited (trading as ‘Post-Quantum’) is a private limited company > incorporated in England and Wales with registered number 06808505. > > This email is meant only for the intended recipient. If you have received > this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying > of this email is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately of the > error by return email and please delete this message from your system. Thank > you in advance for your cooperation. > > For more information about Post-Quantum, please visit www.post-quantum.com. > > In the course of our business relationship, we may collect, store and > transfer information about you. Please see our privacy notice at > www.post-quantum.com/privacy-policy/ to learn about how we use this > information. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
