Cool. I might leave that for a different PR, but if something along those lines seems obvious or necessary, I'll go ahead and do it.
> On Jun 23, 2021, at 4:37 PM, Martin Thomson <m...@lowentropy.net> wrote: > > Whatever you can do to improve the readability of this document would be > greatly appreciated. It's a complicated design and I always spend far too > much time trying to find answers to my questions. A better structure would > be appreciated. > > I do find that questions aren't always about behaviour. They are also about > protocol elements, and those a scattered piecemeal throughout. So I would be > disappointed if any restructuring were limited to just getting the time > sequence straightened out. > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021, at 09:04, Carrick Bartle wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm bringing https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/issues/412 to >> the list since it looks like we're (hopefully) getting close to the end >> game with ECH. >> >> The ECH draft is currently organized such that it describes all client >> behavior and then all server behavior. Personally, I find this very >> confusing to follow, and I'm constantly having to flip back and forth >> between sections (which themselves constantly refer to each other). >> Does anyone object to my rearranging the content to be in more of the >> order in which things occur rather than being divided into client and >> server sections? Of course, depending on how I do it, it could end up >> being *more* confusing, but I just wanted to see if people were opposed >> to it in principle. >> >> Carrick >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
