Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> writes: > Until the WG have selected between tcpcrypt and tcp-use-tls > I don't think it makes any sense for tcp-eno to delve into > ciphersuite or cryptographic algorithm details.
Okay, but I just want to clarify one thing: We should separate TCP-ENO, the draft, from my (possibly ill-advised) ramblings on this mailing list, even though I'm an author of TCP-ENO. TCP-ENO provides negotiation in the abstract. That could be used to negotiate between TCPINC v1 and v2, or TLS v1.3 and v2.0, or someday TCPINC with and without large option/dedicate middlebox support, or anything else. ENO could also be used to negotiate between TCPINC with one cipher suite and TCPINC with another cipher suite, *if TCPINC itself does not negotiate cipher suites* (which means it's not TLS). We can debate whether or not the latter use of TCP-ENO is a good idea, but that probably won't be a particularly useful debate at this point. If the WG adopts TCP-ENO and TLS, I don't think anybody believes ENO should specify cipher suites. Rather, it should negotiate how to embed TLS into TCP (especially if TCPM does something we can take advantage of) or maybe what version of TLS to use (in the event that something about TCP-use-TLS could benefit from a significant rearchitecting to take advantage of TLS 2.0). David _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list Tcpinc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
