On 06/04/2020, 12:17, "Rob Sayre" <say...@gmail.com> wrote: > Are there decisions here that will be difficult to reverse?
At a first glance it doesn't seem likely. The spec is quite malleable and gives implementations a lot of leeway. That said, as currently written, this doesn't seem to work particularly well on paths that are lossy, slow, and with small MTUs (or a combination thereof), which we need to make sure it's reasonably well covered as it happens to be one of our main use cases. I'm inclined to say this could be solved by profiling the reliability scheme for constrained networks (in I-D.tschofenig-uta-tls13-profile), but there still things that can be said wrt ACK timing here that can improve implementations in the general case, I think. Cheers IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
