On 2014-7-29, at 8:58, marcelo bagnulo braun <marc...@it.uc3m.es> wrote: > the charter reads: > > - must always provide integrity protection of the payload data (it is > open for discussion for the WG if the TCP header should or should not > be protected). > > So, I dont think we can clarify this, since it is up to the WG to figure it > out.
So we do still need to figure it out :-) My personal take is that the main goal of tcpinc is to make the widespread eavesdropping on plaintext connections harder. So focus the focus should be on the payload, and interoperability should trump protection against other attacks. I fully understand that there are different opinions on this, and they are equally valid. But we need to figure out where the consensus of the WG on this lies. Lars
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list Tcpinc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
