I rather prefer ECHO. -Ekr
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:31 AM Erik Nygren <erik+i...@nygren.org> wrote: > +1 to "ETCH" > > Any objections to that or concerns with that? > (Agreed it would be good to finalize this ASAP.) > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 7:03 PM Tommy Pauly <tpauly= > 40apple....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > >> ECHO is more fun to say, but I do see how it can be confusing (sounding >> like some sort of ping) when out of the context of TLS. >> >> To that end, I’d have a minor preference for “ETCH”.. >> >> Thanks, >> Tommy >> >> > On May 7, 2020, at 3:52 PM, Christopher Wood <c...@heapingbits.net> >> wrote: >> > >> > Erik raises some compelling reasons to change the name from ECHO to... >> something else less confusing or misleading [1]. Candidates from the PR >> include ETCH (Encrypted TLS Client Hello), ECH, and EHELLO. Since the >> HTTPSSVC draft aims for WGLC before IETF 108, it would be good if we got >> this bikeshedding out of the way now. To that end, if you have an opinion >> on the name and whether or not we should change it, please share it! >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Chris (no hat) >> > >> > [1] https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/issues/232 >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > TLS mailing list >> > TLS@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >> >> _______________________________________________ >> TLS mailing list >> TLS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >> > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
