Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Make SNI more clearly mandatory (#3326)

[ekr <[e-mail]>]

ekr commented on this pull request.



> @@ -312,11 +317,14 @@ an explicit port.
 
 ## Connection Establishment {#connection-establishment}
 
-HTTP/3 relies on QUIC as the underlying transport.  The QUIC version being used
-MUST use TLS version 1.3 or greater as its handshake protocol.  HTTP/3 clients
-MUST indicate the target domain name during the TLS handshake. This may be done
-using the Server Name Indication (SNI) {{!RFC6066}} extension to TLS or using
-some other mechanism.
+HTTP/3 relies on QUIC version 1 as the underlying transport.  The use of other
+QUIC transport versions with HTTP/3 MAY be defined by future specifications.
+
+QUIC version 1 uses TLS version 1.3 or greater as its handshake protocol.
+HTTP/3 clients MUST support a mechanism to indicate the target host to the
+server during the TLS handshake.  Unless an alternative mechanism for indicating
+the target host is used, clients MUST use the Server Name Indication (SNI)
+{{!RFC6066}} extension to TLS if the target host is a DNS name.

Maybe
"If the server is identified by a DNS name, clients MUST send the Server Name Indication (SNI) ... extension to TLS unless an alternative mechanism for indicating the server is available"

Note that we'll want to carefully word this to avoid requiring SNI when doing QUIC with mDNS candidates for WebRTC.

-- 
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/pull/3326#pullrequestreview-339876987