On 05/12/15 12:12, Nick Hilliard wrote: > tls will satisfy usability, presence in shipping code and likelihood of > deployment. It comes at the cost of either using a different port number > or else adding startls into the protocol. It's understandable why there > would be opposition to implementing this at revision -16 and with code > widely deployed in the field. But from the point of view of the question > "where do we want to be a couple of years down the road from now?", it's a > pile better than ipsec from an operations point of view.
Just in case it's not clear, I very much agree with the above. S. _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
