Christian Huitema <huit...@huitema.net> writes: >That chimes with David Benjamin's analysis about the "whole mess of >transport-related concerns that just don't apply to TLS". The expertise for >that is in the transport area, not in the TLS WG.
LDAP was once described as "a bunch of networking types trying to reinvent 1960s database technology", is this a case of a bunch of crypto types trying to reinvent TCP, except that it's made even more difficult because of all the crypto considerations? Just thinking out loud here but could the transport folks define some sort of reliable-UDP transport mechanism that you could then run whatever you like over? Or, given that we've got WireGuard and OpenVPN already solving the problem for a lot of cases, is what's left big enough for anyone to care? Is there much use for it left outside of SIP and online gaming (the latter presumably just because it's there rather than any specific need for DTLS)? Peter. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
