I can't see this is necessary and as a matter of policy, restricting competition for the sake of saving a few bytes on the wire... The industry has enough anti-Trust issues without people creating new ones.
Anyone who proposes an OPTIMIZATION has to be 100% compatible with the legacy. The solution in this case is pretty clear: Only use compression for the CAs you expect it to provide a benefit for. Process the rest as normal. On Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 11:47 PM Watson Ladd <watsonbl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 8:35 PM Phillip Hallam-Baker > <ph...@hallambaker.com> wrote: > > > > Which compression scheme is this? > > Abridge certificate compression from > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/117/session/tls > > > > Why is this compression scheme likely to take off when there was no > interest in pursuing my proposal or that of Rob Straddling ten years ago? > > > > I am not sure why the number of CAs would lead to issues either. Please > explain. > > Each CA has a root that has to be identified and an intermediate that > also needs identification. This increases the amount of data the > clients have to ship with. > > Sincerely, > Watson Ladd > -- > Astra mortemque praestare gradatim > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dev-security-policy@mozilla.org" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dev-security-policy+unsubscr...@mozilla.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CAMm%2BLwhf1wt8Dy7fh6zcLRrNzu_VrCai88_zVEpFOgyfFjSEyw%40mail.gmail.com.
