I have some concerns here that I floated in the bug.
At a high level, ipv[46]hints seems like a regression from the way things
are in ESNI.
-Ekr
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 9:01 AM Tommy Pauly wrote:
> I'm also supportive of this change, and in general of using HTTPSSVC for
> the transmission of
I'm also supportive of this change, and in general of using HTTPSSVC for the
transmission of ESNI keys, speaking as an implementer at Apple.
With regards to the per-version structure, I agree with Steven that the
structure of the configuration should be able to change between versions. I
think
Hiya,
On 25/10/2019 01:28, Christopher Wood wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> DNSOP recently adopted HTTPSSVC [1]. Rather than have two ways of
> doing the same thing, I've put together a PR that drops the custom
> ESNI RRType in favor of this more general (yet feature compatible)
> Resource Record:
>
> h
So a global replace of ESNIKeys with ESNIConfig and deleting a now-redundant
section. Looks good to me!
> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/187
Very happy to see the re-use!
___
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.or
