[Standards] XTLS revisited
stpeter at stpeter.im
Mon Dec 15 19:28:15 UTC 2008
Dirk Meyer wrote:
> 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.
Yes, but why not minimize the reasons for blocking end-to-end encryption?
More information about the Standards