> > > As Alissa, I was wondering why it wasn’t easier to fix the one > implementation instead. > > Because it's widely fielded, and browsers don't know in advance what kind of server they are talking to.
> The shepherd wrote: "Since then it has been found that this extension can > server (sic) to alleviate issues with issues in several vendor's > products. There was good consensus to move forward with this document as > it may find further applicability in the future.” So it looks like the > problem is not just one implementation… > There's another potential future application for DTLS to allow the client to pad out the ClientHello to MTU size (or rather for the server to insist on it) thus reducing the risk of amplification. -Ekr > If the WG now thinks that this extension may be valuable for other things > besides fixing bugs, then it might be nice to reword some of the document > to not focus on what seems to be one bug and just present the extension > for what it is: padding. > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
