[Standards] XTLS revisited

Dirk Meyer dmeyer at tzi.de
Mon Dec 15 19:27:24 UTC 2008

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Justin Karneges wrote:
>> On Monday 15 December 2008 07:46:16 Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> Therefore I suggest that we simplify e2e by using
>>> something very close to the original XTLS proposal to set up, use, and
>>> tear down and XTLS tunnel. I've outlined the protocol below.
>> First, we should use IBB.  Sure, it adds complexity with the block sizes and 
>> message vs iq, but you want this stuff.  The only downside is the extra round 
>> trip on startup.  
> And the concern that lots of server admins will block IBB because people
> use it for file transfer, whereas (some) server admins might be less
> likely to block a technology that enables user security.

Since you can use IBB over XTLS, an admin may ban XTLS, too.


If you're not part of the solution, be part of the problem!

More information about the Standards mailing list