On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 2:47 PM Kris Kwiatkowski <kris= [email protected]> wrote:
> I support adoption, as long as the RECOMMENDED field is set to N at this > point in time (which is a case). > Just to avoid doubt, you mean "publication", because this doc is in WGLC? -Ekr > Nits: > > * draft talks about "expanded keys" and "decapsulation key seeds", but > does not define them. I think it would be good to refer to the relevant > sections in the FIPS-203, to make it clear what they are. > * Section 4. ends weirdly "Section 4.2.7 of [RFC8446]" - should this be a > full sentence? > * Double 'and' in the Abstract "...NamedGroups and and registers IANA..." > and double 'the' in Section 5. > > Kris > > On 08/11/2025 15:37, Russ Housley wrote: > > I support adoption. > > I am pleased to see the IANA registry entries for the ML-KEM code points as > RECOMMENDED = N; at some point in the future the TLS WG might want to change > that, but this seems like the right place to start. > > Nits: > > Abstract: s/and and/and/ > > Section 1.1: s/key establishment/key encapsulation/ > > Russ > > > On Nov 5, 2025, at 1:51 PM, Sean Turner via Datatracker <[email protected]> > <[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] > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
