Usama: This is the outcome of a coordination call that took place a few weeks ago between the leadership of the IETF and the leadership of IEEE 802.11. The IEEE publications can reference document, but they do not have a way to reference IANA code points.
Russ > On Apr 2, 2026, at 3:27 PM, Muhammad Usama Sardar > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Robert and Peter, > > Thank you for sharing IEEE 802.11 WG position. > > >> The IEEE 802.11 Working Group would like to express support for publication >> of draft-ietf-tls-mlkem as an RFC with its definition of key establishment >> options that use pure ML-KEM. > I was actually hoping to see some technical rationale for support of > publication. The attachment to the LS just repeats the same statement. Am I > missing something? If not, may I kindly ask if you could possibly enlighten > us with technical reasons behind this support? In particular, has IEEE 802.11 > WG done some research, such as cryptanalysis? Pointers to the analysis would > be very helpful. > > Moreover, was the IEEE 802.11 WG aware of this recent draft [0]? In the light > of this, I am curious if IEEE 802.11 WG still believes there is real need for > RFC. > > Finally, I would like to know if IEEE 802.11 WG position is that this RFC > should be published independent of recommending hybrids [1]? > > Looking forward to more insights. > > Thank you! > > Best regards, > > -Usama > > [0] > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email/ > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-usama-tls-ecdhe-mlkem-update/ >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
