On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 01:35:50 am Eric Mill wrote:
> It looks like the abbreviation this draft uses is just "SI". It uses SNI at
> the top a few times to refer to Server Name Indication (which it typos as
> "service" name extension).
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 1:13 AM, Dave Garrett wrote:
>
On Monday, March 28, 2016 09:50:13 pm Dacheng Zhang wrote:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-tls-service-indication-extension/
You really should not use SNI as your abbreviation, as it will just be
frequently confused with the server_name extension which is already the
dominant use
Hi,
We have proposed an exension for TLS to transfer the information indicating
the service the client intends to access. A motivation scenario is the
reverse charging.
Any comments and suggestions are really appreciated.
You can find the draft through the following link:
https://datatracker
