Hiya,
On 09/04/2026 13:46, Salz, Rich wrote:
This framing is I think unopinionated to the point of avoding mention of the specific risks that motivate hybrids, and the need to consider those risks before choosing a non-hybrid, with a hybrid as the prudent default choice when in doubt.Then those arguments should have been made in the hybrid documents.
Disagree. The higher risk applies to non-hybrids so needs to be documented as RFCs for those are processed.
Or Stephen’s proposed draft.
Yep, that'd be the way to do it:-)
I don’t know of any IETF RFC — if you do, please post — that says “here’s how to do something, but don’t do it if xxxx yyy or zzz.”
That's very common - anything with a SHOULD NOT seems like a match to me. (RFC8446 has a few.) Cheers, S.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
