IMO, if you're not protecting the TCP header the solutions should not be
called TCP anything, nor should it be integrated as a TCP option. It's
basically just TLS with no signature on either end, and that ought to
suffice if that's all you really want.
However, protection from rogue middleboxes is something I'd appreciate,
and that can't be done solely as a payload of the transport layer.
Joe
On 7/27/2014 11:57 PM, marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:
Hi,
As we discussed in the meeting, we should try to make some design
decisions for TCPINC.
One of them is whether to protect or not the TCP header.
I would like to start the discussion on this topic. Arguments on one way
or the other?
regards, marcelo
_______________________________________________
Tcpinc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
_______________________________________________
Tcpinc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
