Re: [ntpwg] NTS: DTLS and symmetric mode

[Aanchal Malhotra <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Job Snijders <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 02:26:57PM -0400, Daniel Franke wrote:
> > On Jul 31, 2017 1:47 PM, "Harlan Stenn" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > Dave Mills recalls seeing a message where it was stated that DTLS is
> > > great for client/server associations, but DTLS was not an
> > > efficient/effective/whatever way to establish a symmetric
> > > association.
> >
> > I recall you asserting this in Prague but I haven't seen said message
> > or > anything else which would substantiate this claim. Do you have
> > details?
>
> And how would it compare to QUIC?
>
> If QUIC has been discussed before, I'd appreciate pointers to the
> appropiate archive URLs.
>

We never discussed NTP over QUIC, partly because it is still a draft and
not an IETF standard. But also because it does not have any implementation
yet except for the one by google which is specifically for HTTP. Standard
crypto libraries of course do not support it yet. So there will be
deployment issues for NTP.

Having said that, I still feel it is worth having a discussion on if we can
do NTP over QUIC, given that it is specifically designed to provide low
latency for connection establishment and transport (which is exactly what
we need.) But there may be other caveats?

>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
> _______________________________________________
> ntpwg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg
>

_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
[e-mail]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg