issues
search
echdeploy
/
draft-ech-deployment-considerations
IETF draft describing TLS ECH deployment considerations
Other
4
stars
1
forks
source link
issues
Newest
Newest
Most commented
Recently updated
Oldest
Least commented
Least recently updated
Added endpoint considerations
#84
tomnsmoothwall
opened
5 months ago
0
Added OPS and made the make
#83
Andrew-419
closed
8 months ago
0
IETF area was changed from SEC to OPS
#82
Andrew-419
closed
8 months ago
0
Introducing a first initial draft section to cover COP.
#81
taddhar
opened
8 months ago
0
Agreement to have a 5th section on anti-piracy
#80
taddhar
opened
8 months ago
0
Agreement to have a 4th use case on COP
#79
taddhar
opened
8 months ago
0
Sni unreliable branch
#78
taddhar
opened
8 months ago
0
Resyncing github on Rev 8. Creating the appendix section --- back.
#77
taddhar
closed
9 months ago
2
Do we want to consider rules on this repository to force each contributor to work on his fork first
#76
taddhar
opened
11 months ago
0
Considerations for Institutions (e.g. educational institution) using Web Filtering after ECH
#75
flyingeng
opened
1 year ago
1
Note RF9505
#74
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
0
Put the appendix after --- back
#73
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
0
Use a tool for captioning during our SPRINTs
#72
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
3
Capture #594 PR comments
#71
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
0
Fixing the bug introduced in the release of -06.
#70
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
Added 2 contributors.
#69
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
First text fixing the critiques on SNI not reliable, why SNI and ECH …
#68
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
Rework the time slots for the ad-hoc calls
#67
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
SNI is not reliable, Use DNS instead. Potential DNS limitations.
#66
zied-turki
opened
1 year ago
30
We don’t care about SNI reliability, server certificate is indeed reliable !
#65
zied-turki
opened
1 year ago
2
ECH deployment migration issues
#62
PascalPaisant
opened
1 year ago
1
Isn't SNI also used by middleboxes to decrypt / inspect https session data and not only to filter target destination ?
#61
PascalPaisant
opened
1 year ago
2
Fixed a minor editorial mistake as 'pervasing'.
#60
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
Amend the Enterprise section regarding the fact that ECH is mostly optional in browsers
#59
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
0
Move problems like 'too many RRs' or 'Client Facing sharing SNI with backend' to TLS github
#58
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
1
RFC editors recommendations on metadata
#57
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Minor fix on pervasive monitoring.
#56
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
Likely the last editorial changes before submitting -05.
#55
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Arnaud dev branch
#54
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Significant improvements in the structure and the flow for -05
#53
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
2
Section 10 for "Potential further development of this work" should be heavily reviewed
#52
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
2
There is a glitch in the I-D about the acknowledgments that is in a section way before the list of contributors
#51
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Make sure the I-D doesn't refer to work items that expired in IETF
#50
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
0
Shall we increase or decrease the keywords in the I-D?
#49
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
0
Should the I-D still be a 'stand_alone: yes' in markdown?
#48
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
The Internet Draft is still pointing to SECDISPATCH
#47
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Enterprises considerations are a specific issue of the more general problem
#46
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
1
"end user input"
#45
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Make a clear case why each “issue” is a problem, don’t just assert that they are
#44
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
False dichotomy with SNI vs IP blocking ... SNI is a lie
#43
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
1
The loss of visibility of the SNI data will make it much harder to detect attacks
#42
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
1
Lack of clarity in the document
#41
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Discussions on the essence of ECH
#40
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
The I-D should include considerations why ECH is absolutely critical in some circumstances
#39
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
2
Is there an equivalent of 'tlswg' organisation in IETF OPSEC working group?
#38
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
A GitHub repo under a personal entity allows only one admin
#37
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
1
Change the introduction, adds a new section, memory to Simon.
#36
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
Testing a new branch so that Arnaud is not changing directly the repo…
#35
taddhar
closed
1 year ago
0
Shall we go solutions?
#34
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
1
Identify use cases that previously relied on seeing SNI
#33
taddhar
opened
1 year ago
4
Next