> On Oct 29, 2025, at 12:47, Watson Ladd <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2025, 9:03 AM Nico Williams <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 03:54:11PM +0000, Kampanakis, Panos wrote: >> > Good idea. Option (f) could be an erratum that calls out EdDSA and >> > ML-DSA as examples of "built-in digest signatures" in X.509 that fall >> > under the non MD-5/SHA-1 hash bullet of RFC 5929. >> >> Is that truly an erratum? I think an update is in order. (Who shall do >> that work?) > > > I volunteer. I think once we finish this thread it's a pretty straightforward > though tedious exercise in copypasta to write what we wrote.
Watson, Hi! If you’re serious about this please address the following: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5705&rec_status=15&presentation=table Cheers, spt
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
