On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thom...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15 November 2016 at 16:12, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <n...@redhat.com> wrote: >> TLDR; the privacy offered by this extension is the same as the privacy >> of DTLS over UDP. > > I disagree. All the privacy considerations of the QUIC connection ID > apply here. It would probably pay to follow that discussion. > > If the intent of this is simply to deal with the NAT rebinding issue, > then I think that this is worth doing, but to say that this does not > have privacy issues would be overstating the case.
I thought we were going to kill NAT with IPv6, but apparently you can't remove bad ideas from the Internet. Another place where connection IDs are needed is with mobile clients: anyone who has used ssh while switching networks knows the pain the lack of a connection ID distinct from the 4-tuple brings. > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls -- "Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains". --Rousseau. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
