On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 8:53 AM Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> writes: > > > The current document has Recommended=N for *all* the algorithms. Above, I > > proposed changing them to Y, which would also entail changing the > document > > to be Proposed Standard. We've now heard a number of counterproposals, > > including (1) leave as-is (2) just mark X25519 Y (3) take out the NIST > > curves. > > > > At this point it's not clear to me that any of these has consensus, so > that > > chairs need to work that out. However, given that there have been a > number > > of objections to (3), I doubt very much that that would pass WGLC (and I, > > at least, would object to it.). > > Do you have any technical argument against separating the widely > deployed X25519MLKEM768 (which I believe ought to be > StandardsTrack/Recommended=Y) from the more marginal NIST curves (which > I believe are more appropriate as Informational/Recommended=N)? > You may or may not feel that this is a technical argument, but P-256 and P-384 on their own are both Recommended=Y and we are in the process of publishing RFC 8446-bis, which actually has P-256 as the MTI, and I think being consistent with both of these is good. -Ekr
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
