Greetings, all,

> On 31 Jul 2015, at 11:24, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> On Thu 2015-07-30 18:26:03 -0400, David Mazieres wrote:
> > The new draft, called draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpeno-00 (TCP-ENO), is
> > available at the following URL:
> >
> >         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpeno/
> 
> I like this proposal and i think it should be adopted by the WG.  It
> represents exactly the kind of convergence work people were arguing for
> at the recent meeting.
> 
> Can folks from the tcp-use-tls draft comment on whether they think they
> could use this mechanism (or something we evolve from it as a group)?
> 
> I think that separating out negotiation of the security protocol from the 
> protocol
> itself is a really good idea (indeed, I suggested it a while ago and I would 
> have
> no trouble splitting the TCP-use-TLS draft to use such a mechanism.
> 
> I haven't had time to give this draft a close read but it looks like it's 
> headed in the
> right direction.

I've read the draft.

I may have a few tiny nits to pick with the details of the extension mechanism, 
and it's not clear to me that section 4 should be in this (Standards Track) 
document, instead of a separate informational API document. But the approach is 
a sound way forward, separate from the question of what an eventual TCPINC 
protocol looks like, and I would support its adoption as a working group item, 
should such a call for adoption be issued.

Cheers,

Brian

> -Ekr
> _______________________________________________
> Tcpinc mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
Tcpinc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Reply via email to