Hi, I think there is no real reason to publish this document, and publishing sends the wrong signal about hybrid vs not. We should not publish it. Obviously there is a codepoint that people can use who feel they need it. We specifically designed the registry policy to allow that.
Sincerely, Watson On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 1:52 PM Sean Turner via Datatracker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-mlkem-05 (Ends 2025-11-26) > > This message starts a 3-week WG Last Call for this document. > > Abstract: > This memo defines ML-KEM-512, ML-KEM-768, and ML-KEM-1024 as > NamedGroups and and registers IANA values in the TLS Supported Groups > registry for use in TLS 1.3 to achieve post-quantum (PQ) key > establishment. > > File can be retrieved from: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-mlkem/ > > Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the > publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected] > in copy. Objections should be motivated and suggestions to resolve them are > highly appreciated. > > Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded again of the > Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 > [1]. Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the > provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of > any. Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can > be found at [3]. > > Thank you. > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ > [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] -- Astra mortemque praestare gradatim _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
