On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 at 19:39, Simo Sorce <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 2025-10-10 at 11:49 +0530, tirumal reddy wrote:
> >
> > The decision that it is for interoperability is already discussed and
> finalized in Section 4 of draft-ietf-cose-dilithium. This document aligns
> with that decision
>
> There is no need to repeat a controversial statement (that adds nothing
> to the decision made in the document) just because they are present in
> another IETF document. The COSE draft should drop that incorrect
> statement as well IMO.
>

I disagree. Reiterating this point here ensures consistency and helps
understand the alignment across related documents.
draft-ietf-cose-dilithium is already in the RFC editor queue and this issue
was discussed in the COSE WG,  see
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/gF4yEG8ps03nvgvPHALiMkYwg68/ .

-Tiru


>
> --
> Simo Sorce
> Distinguished Engineer
> RHEL Crypto Team
> Red Hat, Inc
>
>
_______________________________________________
jose mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to