Dec. 16, 2019
3:21 a.m.
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 07:01, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> wrote:
The proposal needs to address algorithm rollover in more detail. Why is it not proposed for this next change, when adoption of shorter hash/signatures would impact directly on the packetsize related problems of extended periods of operation with increased signature counts?
+1 there should be a predictable timeline for algorithm rollover and as a result a advance timeline for study, review, and testing work on this. Otherwise there will be no actual work on this.
Davey