> On 15 Feb 2017, at 19:25, Martin Thomson <martin.thom...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 16 February 2017 at 04:20, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >> No, not really, but TLS is not just the web, and there are connections that >> last for a long time and transfer large amounts of data. Think datacenter >> synchronization. At packet-sized records 24 million records amounts to 36 >> GB. That is considerably larger than a 4 GB software update I downloaded >> over HTTPS a few years ago, but not out of the ballpark. > > I realize that's going to require updates pretty often (once you open > up the CWND), but I don't think that it is frequent enough to be a > concern. > > I well know that HTTP gets used at these volumes more often than > people realize. I'd rather recommend ChaCha for those niche uses > though if the rate was sufficiently high.
I agree with Yoav Nir here, it's certainly not a niche use* and one's implementation should not be forced to use a certain cipher mode if there would be better options (e.g. because -- as pointed out earlier -- hardware support is available). * We'll all agree that most of the TLS traffic is made up by HTTPS requests, still, there are many other uses and we design protocols not just for the web. That's W3C. Aaron
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
