Hi Paul, I am not quite sure why I am listed as ambivalent. Before the listed announcement on April 15th, the mail archive lists two messages by me on topic [0]. There is [1], in which I specifically write
> I agree with Stephen on this one and would not support adoption of > non-hybrids. And there is [2], stating > Even with Recommended=N, I can imagine many managers reacting to a > presentation on "YOU NEED TO USE PQC LIKE ML-KEM BECAUSE ELSE..." by googling > "deploy ML-KEM now" and being recommended this rather than a safer > hybrid[omitted reference]. I am not convinced that such a person, if given > more knowledge, "doesn't want to do that". which doesn't sound too ambivalent to me either. This is why in my own earlier count [3] I counted myself as "Against Adoption" on April 17th. My guess is that some messages I wrote afterwards might have led you to believe I was ambivalent. Most notably, in response to your reply to my count I wrote in [4] that > I still believe that not adopting this would have been better, but I am > willing to follow along and help improve the document. > After all, perhaps someone will convince me in the future that there are > situations where PQ-only KEMs are better :) In case that was misunderstood, I want to clarify that "playing along" was meant as a reaffirmation of my earlier statement in [3]: > Neither am I threatening to appeal And that as a direct consequence I was trying to influence the contents of this draft. In fact, there is an open pull request on the document by me [5]. What I did not say is that I was okay with the adoption, just not disagreeing enough to appeal, which seems to be inline with several people listed as "Against Adoption" in both our counts. Best, -- TBB [0] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/?q=Thomas%20Bellebaum [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/YyemGJF-4-hRVwOcJ47Rw4Nu8Js/ [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/aVBEbq2i3Zsurjtv77nY-Rwwhlo/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/JUwF8dv1KfniWGHAUX_oIgP-e2A/ [4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/jGdaXlsAtER75XDatBcFdUW5ZUA/ [5] https://web.archive.org/web/20251103101335/https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-mlkem/pull/6
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
