Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding overhead in DNS over QUIC scenarios (#3523)

[ekr <[e-mail]>]

Won't DoQ need a different ALPN?

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 5:06 PM Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> I don't like the idea of creating a version of Quic especially for DNS
> over Quic, because of the privacy implications. Of course it could be
> negotiated and remembered, but then it looks like painting the packets with
> a big target for various kinds of firewall filtering. But then using
> shorter initials also paints a big target.
>
> I also don't advocate holding V1 at the gate to solve that. I like the
> suggestion to allow shorter initial packets and to limit the number of
> bytes that the server sends. But i get that we may want to wait for V2 for
> that.
>
> For now, I will concentrate on other optimizations, such as limiting the
> packet overhead. That can be done with implementation guidance.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3523#issuecomment-600358797>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIPLILMF4HC5TKEY45LWGDRIAF6TANCNFSM4LIG6WCQ>
> .
>


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3523#issuecomment-601237238