On 27 Apr 2017, at 17:51, Shumon Huque wrote:
Perhaps we should revisit the decision not to encrypt the ALPN extension (NPN redux?).
The term "we" is probably not appropriate here. It was not this WG that made that decision: it was the TLS WG, after multiple threads with (I believe) hundreds of messages.
It seems that might have helped use cases like these in the more robust manner.
Yes, that was the whole point of NPN; in the end it was not persuasive to the TLS WG.
--Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
