Re: [arch-d] <draft-lazanski-consolidation-00>

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

> Are you really intending to say that a headline goal of QUIC is to make 
> it more difficult to manage traffic at the network layer, and by 
> implication make it more difficult for ISPs to manage networks?

No, I should have been more careful there.  There were a couple of goals relevant to this.  One was to reduce information exposure and improve privacy with respect to on-path attackers.  The other was to limit active interference by an on-path attacker.

The net effect is that ISPs are less able to manage the details of other people's interactions.  But there are affordances in the protocol that should allow ISPs (and other network operators) to continue to manage their networks effectively.  Of course, it's still a matter of debate how much information or control network operators need from endpoints, but at least QUIC provides end users (or at least end systems) greater ability to decide what happens.
 
> I am more concerned about the loss of privacy that seems to be 
> occurring at the application layer via extensive tracking of users and 
> sharing of user information, rather than my perception of what is now 
> occurring at the network layer.

A totally legitimate concern, but that line of argumentation sounds like whataboutism. Improvements in privacy with respect to the network do not drive privacy violations at the application layer.