W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2015

Re: Browsers and .onion names

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 14:47:51 +1100
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4DE94ED5-B1A8-4CD7-A61E-53C8FA24DB18@mnot.net>
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>

> On 27 Nov 2015, at 2:09 pm, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>> This was discussed at length.
> News to me, thanks Mark. I've just signed up for DNSOP to follow
> along. My initial impression from reviewing recent messages is that
> the discussion is ongoing rather than settled.

I meant in the case of .onion, which has an RFC now. The current question is what to do for others.

>> .onion is much more than that, because it's possible to run not only HTTP, but also XMPP and many other protocols over it. Do we really want an explosion of http-onion, xmpp-onion, etc.? Also, leveraging that into existing software is difficult (mostly because they haven't made protocol schemes a reliable extension point).
> I wouldn't call a doubling of a small number an explosion. Considering
> the magnitude of what Tor is trying to accomplish, the price doesn't
> seem too much of a burden.
> But I'll take this to DNSOP after spending some quality time with the
> archives. I encourage others to do the same.

Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Friday, 27 November 2015 03:48:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:40 UTC