On Wed 2018-12-05 10:35:20 -0500, Brian Haberman wrote: > I think it would be quite useful if someone were to explore the use of > message layer security in the context of DNS. That could be one of the > ones you listed above or it could be the work in MLS. Or even Double > Ratchet. > > If any of these helped reduce the potential state management problem for > DNS authoritative servers, that would be a major benefit IMO.
It's not clear to me that MLS has significantly less state to manage
than TLS 1.3. Indeed, it might require *more* state management. Can
you point to information that suggests there is less of a burden of
state for MLS implementations? Is statefulness the main concern you're
trying to address?
--dkg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
