Jan. 9, 2020
9:22 a.m.
On Jan 9, 2020, at 00:46, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org<mailto:paul.hoffman@icann.org>> wrote: I worry that, as written, there is ambiguity. Is RSSAC requesting a single study that would evaluate both alg roll and length change? or separate studies? Would a single study on length change only satisfy the recommendation (since it says "or")? The latter was what I intended, but I see where there is ambiguity. Better wording might be "... studying and documenting a comprehensive approach to an algorithm rollover, or to a key length change, …” I’ve included this suggested text in the document. <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U1qKPRx9URRfiI4jijvLKSCS2W6upZRDppUsbANq...>