> I would be happy about a recommendation of hybrids over these curves in
> text form (e.g. "Clients and servers SHOULD rank X25519MLKEM768 higher"),
> if this is easy to embed in the process chosen to adopt this document's
> change.
>

I like the idea and started to draft a PR, but figuring out the actual
wording is not that straightforward.

1. X25519MLKEM768 should be ranked higher than X. What is X? All other
(future) keyshares? Listing the non-PQ recommended=Y keyshares explicitly?
The most direct advise would be that client should rank PQ keyshares higher
than non-PQ shares. But that would mean ranking some recommended=N
keyshares higher than recommended=Y shares.

2. Do we need to say anything about HRR? Should a server HRR when the
client sends a non-PQ share, but it and the server do support a PQ share?

Best,

 Bas
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to