-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi Paul,
On 14/03/15 01:19, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Greetings again. I mentioned this to Wouters a while ago, before
> the DPRIVE WG started, but it is worth bringing up here if the WG
> is considering this for widespread deployment.
>
> draft-wijnga
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, W.C.A. Wijngaards wrote:
Could perhaps a different algorithm, like ED25519, provide better
performance, and would that performance then be adequate?
Different algorithms differ in performance how much? A factor 2? Maybe
10? Compared to a botnet, I don't think that it is ve
Hi, all,
I think it's better that this draft contains some solution about the client
authentication to decrease/avoid the DoS attack.
But it's really not the focus of this draft. In order to solve this problem,
many other schemes can be used, such as DHCP, SAVI and DANE. Anyway, this draft
can m
On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:49 AM, W.C.A. Wijngaards wrote:
> On 14/03/15 01:19, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> > Greetings again. I mentioned this to Wouters a while ago, before
> > the DPRIVE WG started, but it is worth bringing up here if the WG
> > is considering this for widespread deployment.
> >
> > draft
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:49 AM, W.C.A. Wijngaards wrote:
>> On 14/03/15 01:19, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> > Greetings again. I mentioned this to Wouters a while ago, before
>> > the DPRIVE WG started, but it is worth bringing up here if the WG
>> >
On Mar 19, 2015, at 7:00 PM, Watson Ladd wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:49 AM, W.C.A. Wijngaards wrote:
>>> On 14/03/15 01:19, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Greetings again. I mentioned this to Wouters a while ago, before
the DPRIVE WG s
