I am in favor of pursuing both drafts, mostly because I think each group has something to offer, and they are disparate-enough camps that it's unlikely the tcpinc effort would be slowed by pursuing both.
IMO, tcpcrypt provides what we really need: a clean break with legacy systems, a simple, easily-understood security primitive with provable security properties, and a natural separation between application-specific authentication and general-purpose encryption. It's also basically ready-to-go, and so having it become standards-track will quickly result in adoption by major Linux distributions. OTOH, TLS-the-brand is established and trusted by vendors, and so a TLS-based proposal would likely gain wide acceptance more quickly simply on that basis. Since the chief goal is to achieve universal encryption, this is not a flippant justification. While both proposals have pros and cons, either will fulfill the goals of the WG. (I just took a look at the TCP-ENO draft, and I propose we accept that as well as the anticipated updated draft of tcpcrypt based on TCP-ENO.) Kyle On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Martin Stiemerling <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear all, > > **Please use this CORRECTED version, as one option to choose from below > didn't make it into the original.**** > Thanks to Erik Rescola for pointing this out to me directly. > > This point got lost on the mailing list, but it has been decided in the WG > session here at IETF-93 that there will be a Last Call for consensus about > which document of the below ones to take as starting point for the WG. > > > Here are the two drafts: > a) draft-rescorla-tcpinc-tls-option-03 > b) draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpcrypt-03 > > Please respond to the tcpinc wg mailing list until > > July 31st, 2015 > 1pm CEST > > on wether you prefer > - either draft a) or b) > - both drafts (a & b) as WG items > - or none > > to be accepted as WG item(s). > > Please write also your brief reasoning on why you made your choice. > > Please note that accepting a draft is not the end of working on the > technical content of the draft, but it is actually the starting point when > the WG has full change control about the content of the draft! > > > Regards, > > Martin Stiemerling > Transport Area Director > > _______________________________________________ > Tcpinc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
