On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Jana Iyengar <j...@google.com> wrote: > FWIW: In my experience middleboxes don't ossify based on what the spec says, > they ossify based on what they see on the wire. So, if common > implementations send CCS in a particular way, that's what will get --- and, > I'll argue, what has gotten --- ossified. I also agree with David and Eric > that compatibility mode shouldn't be required because QUIC doesn't need it.
What does compatibility mode mean here? If we end up with having two slightly different versions of TLS 1.3, one that looks more like TLS 1.2 and the other that does not, that doesn't seem like a good thing to me. My understanding is we already have ossification here and the debate is what to do about it. -- "Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains". --Rousseau. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
