W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features)

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 17:59:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNfK2o89WQwuVUcGXCrThw2a0swk0qaZj-8-zA5uPyiikA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Cc: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
The large difference being that I can't just deploy TCP-AO on 3rd party
machines. I have to wait for the vendors these 3rd parties use to do it
(e.g. the OS vendor), accept patches for it and deploy it, etc.
I have zero control over that, and zero control over the timeframe. That
means I can't plan for it or hurry it along.

Unfortunately, much of the time, my only options are either to complain
about it, or attempt to replace it.

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:

> On 9/4/2013 3:20 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Michael Tuexen
>> <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.**franken.de <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
>> <mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.**franken.de<Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>>>
>> wrote:
>>     On Sep 4, 2013, at 9:43 PM, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:grmocg@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>      > I suspect that Yuchung meant 'widely deployed and available',
>>     when he says 'always'. That should certainly be true for TCP.
>>     That is definitely true for TCP.
>>     However, why do you need an alternate solution to be "widely
>>     deployed". Can't it
>>     be deployed within the browser?
>> I think people are being too imprecise which leads to confusion. UDP is
>> widely deployed. A UDP based solution can be deployed within the
>> browser. TCP-AO is not widely deployed. It cannot be deployed within the
>> browser.
> Although that's correct, there's no way to protect UDP. TCP-AO is for
> protecting individual TCP connections; if that's what you want, you need to
> update TCP.
> My point about TCP-AO is that it's not useful to continue to complain that
> something isn't widely deployed. If you need what it has, then why not
> start by helping deploy it? Then at least there's one less thing to
> complain about being missing in a few years.
> Joe
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2013 00:59:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:15 UTC