issues
search
tfpauly
/
draft-happy-eyeballs-v3
Other
9
stars
7
forks
source link
issues
Newest
Newest
Most commented
Recently updated
Oldest
Least commented
Least recently updated
A nit: HE helps misconfigured clients too, not just networks or servers
#55
furry13
closed
2 weeks ago
0
nit: 'private' to 'privacy-preserving'
#54
danwing
closed
1 month ago
0
Charter updates based on side meeting
#53
tfpauly
closed
1 month ago
0
WG name bikeshed
#52
tfpauly
opened
2 months ago
2
Inventory of HE-like Uses
#51
boucadair
opened
2 months ago
1
Clarify out-of-scope
#50
tfpauly
closed
2 months ago
0
Eric V charter comments
#49
tfpauly
closed
2 months ago
0
Remove unclear deliverable from charter
#48
ekinnear
closed
2 months ago
0
one liner to emphasis how TLS Encrypted Client Hello impacts
#47
zaheduzzaman
closed
1 month ago
2
Unclear deliverable
#46
zaheduzzaman
closed
2 months ago
4
Editorial updates to charter
#45
ekinnear
closed
5 months ago
0
Preferring RFC8781 over RFC7050
#44
furry13
closed
6 months ago
0
RFC8781 shall be preferred over RFC7050
#43
furry13
closed
6 months ago
0
Should synthesized NAT64 addresses be preferred over native IPv4?
#42
furry13
opened
6 months ago
0
Section 8: IPv6-mostly networks can provide NAT64 w/o DNS64
#41
furry13
opened
6 months ago
4
Who can provide code implementation? Thank you
#40
chongzi
closed
6 months ago
1
Correct format and refer to draft-ietf-tls-svcb-ech
#39
bashi
closed
8 months ago
3
Remove hint-only addresses after receiving A/AAAA
#38
nidhijaju
closed
8 months ago
1
"AAAA response" is ambiguous
#37
ericorth
opened
10 months ago
0
Remove hint-only addresses after receiving A/AAAA
#36
ericorth
closed
8 months ago
4
Why is TCP IPv6 preferred over QUIC IPv4
#35
sukunrt
opened
11 months ago
0
Reference draft-ietf-6man-rfc6724-update
#34
tfpauly
opened
11 months ago
0
The Well-Known Prefix MUST NOT be used to represent non-global IPv4 addresses, such as RFC1918
#33
momoka0122y
opened
11 months ago
0
The Well-Known Prefix MUST NOT be used to represent non-global IPv4 addresses, such as RFC1918
#32
momoka0122y
opened
11 months ago
0
Move up the last Protocol Combination while sorting endpoints
#31
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
0
Move up the last Protocol Combination while sorting
#30
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
3
Clarify wording in Section 4
#29
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
0
Referece PREF64
#28
momoka0122y
closed
11 months ago
0
NAT64 address synthesis warning
#27
momoka0122y
closed
11 months ago
1
Fix typos in Section 5
#26
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
0
Add a note about NAT64 address synthesis
#25
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
3
Discuss impact on DNS-based http->https upgrade
#24
ericorth
opened
11 months ago
0
Section 5: "The priority in a SVCB RR is always greater than 0"
#23
edmonds
closed
11 months ago
0
Section 4: "Once both records are received"
#22
edmonds
closed
11 months ago
0
Refer to PREF64
#21
bashi
closed
11 months ago
2
Section 8.1: When using encrypted DNS translation may also be needed.
#20
momoka0122y
opened
11 months ago
2
Section 8.1: Adding reference to RA PREF64 RFC8781
#19
momoka0122y
closed
11 months ago
0
Section 8.1: RFC7050 should not be applied to 127.0.0.0/8 and RFC1918 address space?
#18
momoka0122y
closed
11 months ago
6
Rephrase TCP related sentences
#17
bashi
closed
11 months ago
2
Update with QUIC
#16
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
0
Acknowledgements
#15
DavidSchinazi
opened
11 months ago
0
Update sorting algorithm with SVCB RRs
#14
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
0
Add a section for connection establishment
#13
bashi
closed
11 months ago
0
Add ALPN handling
#12
bashi
closed
11 months ago
0
Update introduction and overview with SVCB
#11
nidhijaju
closed
11 months ago
0
Discuss QUIC racing specifically
#10
tfpauly
closed
11 months ago
0
Rough draft of changes
#9
tfpauly
closed
11 months ago
0
Add SVCB to the query algorithm
#8
tfpauly
closed
12 months ago
0
Add SVCB to the intro and overview
#7
tfpauly
closed
11 months ago
0
Discuss impact of ECH
#6
tfpauly
opened
1 year ago
8
Next