You guys. TCP is way more than http/s.
----- Reply message ----- From: "Nico Williams" <[email protected]> To: "Tony Arcieri" <[email protected]> Cc: "Kevin Glavin" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Eggert, Lars" <[email protected]>, "Joe Touch" <[email protected]> Subject: [tcpinc] why not just TLS on secure port numbers? Date: Fri, Aug 1, 2014 11:25 PM On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 06:57:10PM -0700, Tony Arcieri wrote: > On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I might have thought so. Except Google did it. > > > > Google is a cool story, but in my book it really doesn't count until > everyone does it and we have full network encryption... Right. Big players can impose HTTPS due to the cost to a nation's citizens (or ISP's customers) of blocking it. To really extend this to everyone else might take confidentiality protection for DNS queries and maybe even not having PTR RRsets. Nico -- _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
_______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
