If the goal of the draft is to raise awareness that: "things are changing, old tools (tcpdump, etc) are not going to be as useful for network troubleshooting when more of the packet is encrypted"
That's a fine goal, but statements in the draft like: " Encryption of the transport layer brings some well-known privacy and security benefits, but also introduces various costs that need to be considered." maybe 'considered' there should be: "planned for" ... There's also this: "Pervasive use of transport header encryption can impact the ways that protocols are designed, standardised, deployed, and operated. The choice of whether future transport protocols encrypt their protocol headers therefore needs to be taken based not solely on security and privacy considerations, but also taking into account the impact on operations, standards, and research." >From an operations perspective it seems that better/different tools is still the end result of these changes. Holding back the tide of better privacy for users in favor of not producing tooling to solve operations problems seems contradictory to a better world for users.
_______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
