- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 11:11:59 +1000
- To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
- Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, DNS Privacy Working Group <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
On 4 May 2017 at 10:43, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote: > I address this in the draft section "Why not ALPN?" -- if anyone thinks > the text there could be improved, i'd be happy to hear suggestions for > how to change it. Mike is suggesting that you define one that is "http + dns" or maybe "http or dns", which would mean that you could use either. Then you convince existing HTTP clients to use that (a few browsers would do the job). Even if they didn't actually DO DNS, you would still be able to hide in the mass/mess that they represent. In TLS 1.3, the server choice is hidden, so even where the server doesn't pick this choice, it works. In TLS 1.2, you probably want to convince a few servers to pick this new thing, but that obviously means more work for those servers.
Received on Thursday, 4 May 2017 01:12:34 UTC