On 2/4/2017 10:57 PM, Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) wrote:
> [CCing TCPM for the part that matters to TCPM]
>
>> 4. citing drafts in support of future large SYN options:
>> “Is there harm in doing this? E.g., is it bad practice to cite internet
>> drafts (non-normatively, of course) in an RFC?”
>
FWIW:
On 2/5/2017 5:26 AM, David Mazieres wrote:
> "Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE)" writes:
>
>> While TCPM discusses large SYN options (for a long time already), all
>> known solutions have downsides. I do not believe that a non-TCPM
>> document should speculate on the feasibility solutions.
> Mi
On 2/4/17, 11:40 AM, "David Mazieres" wrote:
> Achieving stronger security with TCP-ENO requires verifying session
> IDs. Any application relying on ENO for communications security MUST
> incorporate session IDs into its endpoint authentication. By way of
> example, an authentication mec
I'd agree to Joe's proposal "Although this protocol could benefit from extended
SYN space, e.g., to support in-band key coordination, future TEPs should expect
to use only the currently available space."
Michael (chair hat off)
From: Joe Touch
Sent: Mon
