On Oct 2, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
>
> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On Oct 2, 2018, at 3:12 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
>>> Paul Hoffman wrote:
I do not have a scenario where the client (the resolver in this case)
needs downgrade protection for privacy.
>>>
>>> In that case th
Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2018, at 3:12 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> > Paul Hoffman wrote:
> >>
> >> I do not have a scenario where the client (the resolver in this case)
> >> needs downgrade protection for privacy.
> >
> > In that case there's no need to worry about authentication at all.
> >
On Oct 2, 2018, at 3:12 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
>
> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>
>> I do not have a scenario where the client (the resolver in this case)
>> needs downgrade protection for privacy.
>
> In that case there's no need to worry about authentication at all.
> (But I disagree.)
And I disagre
Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> I do not have a scenario where the client (the resolver in this case)
> needs downgrade protection for privacy.
In that case there's no need to worry about authentication at all.
(But I disagree.)
More generally, I don't think the term "opportunistic" is very helpful,
bec
