tirumal reddy <[email protected]> wrote: >> In the building automation space, I'm concerned. >> There are fewer consortia, and the people producing equipment are less >> network focused. >> >> I propose that we wait for LAMPS to finish composite-kem, and then we >> start a >> quantum-safe version of iot-profile.
> If you are referring to
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-pq-composite-kem/, TLS
> only uses composite KEM for ephemeral key exchange and KEM-based
> authentication is not adopted by the TLS WG.
okay, so fair enough...
We can't finish a quantum-safe version of iot-profile until TLS has something
that we can reference. We can start it.
Are you agreeing that we shouldn't do quantum-safety in this document?
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
