> Il 20 marzo 2019 alle 12.38 Joe Abley <jab...@hopcount.ca> ha scritto: > > Seems to me that there's a middle ground within sight here. > > Standardise this privacy mechanism, and specify (with reasoning) that it > should be implemented such that the existence of the channel (but not the > content) can be identified as distinct from other traffic by third parties. > Maybe specify use of a different port number, as was done with DoT. > > Those who choose to ignore that direction and create a covert channel using > port 443 instead will do so. Nothing much we can do to stop that today (I > guarantee it is already happening). The future is not really different.
This is actually the recommendation in section 4.6 of my draft :-) And I agree, it looks like the only possible and reasonable compromise between the two viewpoints. Regards, -- Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange vittorio.bert...@open-xchange.com Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
