Re: New tunnel protocol

On 25 January 2015 at 10:57, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> OK, then maybe put ALPN in the header field's name to remove the
> ambiguity, because there there's nothing that makes it obvious
> that TLS is in use at all, and the name makes one think it's the
> protocol being tunnelled which is named instead of the one inside
> TLS.

I've always considered the name on this draft to be weak.  But I
haven't found a name that I liked better.

Please send suggestions.

Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2015 00:00:42 UTC