Let's finish that last sentence:
I have to think a lot more about the IoT/resource-constrained client
problem, but I still don't think the existence of clients that would be
denied service by this scheme renders the concept completely inapplicable.
___
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Christian Huitema
wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:08 PM, Kyle Rose wrote:
> >
> > Raising the cost of requests has a similar problem in that you're
> punishing
> > every client, but in doing so you do allow all clients capable of
>
On Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:08 PM, Kyle Rose wrote:
>
> Raising the cost of requests has a similar problem in that you're punishing
> every client, but in doing so you do allow all clients capable of absorbing
> the increased cost (e.g., memory, computing power) to get access to the
>
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:57 PM Eric Rescorla wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:53 PM, David Benjamin
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:43 PM Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>
>>> 2% is actually pretty good, but I agree that we're going to need
Dear all,
together with our colleagues from Akamai, we would like to pursue further
the draft on the TLS client puzzles, the first version of which was aired
in 2015. As before, the client puzzles allow a server to request clients
perform a selected amount of computation prior to the server