Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Describe a new version negotiation mechanism which allows for (#1755)

MikkelFJ <> Thu, 27 September 2018 06:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D02A130E10 for <>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 23:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.455
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.456, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K6WR26U86qXL for <>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 23:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EA9A130E0F for <>; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 23:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 23:51:34 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1538031094; bh=5rcSuZlrXaQHOKReel6YCyO/8Kf0dxPHdpdMCrh59pk=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=NyYTO+113UanjcPzqXWf3ndGH/kWnPbSEaULZyAgn16hICzmDriEYswmx4FmQT+tt w7TMxfXcXKo/ORFh0fd6D0D15WIZW7MqytGKOdNl5nrZ5ll8PHYNuIeAQp2GBc6+KF 0biEYEnG2UStr6fP0lrZV2GvNaucefFJiHQZpRaA=
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1755/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Describe a new version negotiation mechanism which allows for (#1755)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5bac7df638ff4_697a3fec3c2d45c06711a2"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 06:51:37 -0000

Any risk of a downgrade attack sounds like a big loose. Especially if the only concern is to save a few messages during a few hours of deployment of a new server. Otherwise, if it can be done safely, by all means...

The IoT scenario is very real. For example, the author of the new BearSSL is concerned about the cost of TLS 1.3 on constrained devices and believe TLS 1.2 will live on. This will consequently lead to a different version of QUIC for such devices, if he is right.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: