Damien Miller <djm%mindrot.org@localhost> writes:Note that our implementation does not accept compressed points. I think that is was a mistake to allow these as optional in the RFC, because there is no way of recovering if one side does not accept them.From experience with TLS and S/MIME I don't think there's any danger of anyone every using compressed points, so in practice it probably won't be an issue. Still, it'd be useful to have errata for the RFC that removes them or at least makes them a SHOULD NOT.
That's really not within the scope of something that can be done in errata. Errata can be used to point out errors in the document, where it is unclear or doesn't say what it was intended to say. They cannot be used as a means of changing an IETF consensus protocol with a lighter-weight process than obtaining an IETF consensus to make the change. Removing support for compressed points or changing the requirements level that applies would require an update in the form of a new RFC.
That said, I've no objection to the change itself. -- Jeff