Closed marten-seemann closed 2 years ago
I think it makes sense to bump the revision version, even though there is no change to the wire format. What do you think?
I don't think so, this is just a (very large) editorial change. #453 will bump the version number anyway.
do we want to replace it with a brief general description of high level functions?
We describe that this is a secure channel? Is there anything you'd like to add to that?
The interface exposed by a libp2p Noise implementation is highly implementation-specific. Really, there’s no reason to even suggest something like
SecureInbound
andSecureOutbound
, there are other ways to implement (and name) this that are equally conformant with this spec and interoperable with other implementations.More importantly, the references made to early data in this section directly contradict what we’re planning to do with early data for WebTransport (#404), WebRTC (#412) and muxer negotiation (#446).