Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 03:27:19 -0800
From: Alessandro Ghedini <notifications@github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/134/271552046@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/134@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/134@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Certificate compression (#134)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="--==_mimepart_5874c5178b7b9_fc83fdb2fc231308313c";
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/xUtx9DiaWDpG6x_KBMnRUWce220>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Reply-To: quic@ietf.org


----==_mimepart_5874c5178b7b9_fc83fdb2fc231308313c
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

FTR I raised the issue on the TLS list [here](https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg22065.html), however the main response was "compression is scary", but it could just be due to lack of details on my part.

Unfortunately I haven't been able to find the time to do any experimenting (or indeed reply to the mail thread), and haven't heard from Victor.

As for caching, it seems to me RFC7924 is quite a bit less flexible than what we have in Google QUIC (namely, you can only cache full chains, not single entries AFAICT, so e.g. you can't just cache intermediates), but again haven't been able to do any experimenting.

-- 
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/134#issuecomment-271552046
----==_mimepart_5874c5178b7b9_fc83fdb2fc231308313c
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p>FTR I raised the issue on the TLS list <a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org=
/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg22065.html">here</a>, however the main r=
esponse was "compression is scary", but it could just be due to lack of d=
etails on my part.</p>
<p>Unfortunately I haven't been able to find the time to do any experimen=
ting (or indeed reply to the mail thread), and haven't heard from Victor.=
</p>
<p>As for caching, it seems to me RFC7924 is quite a bit less flexible th=
an what we have in Google QUIC (namely, you can only cache full chains, n=
ot single entries AFAICT, so e.g. you can't just cache intermediates), bu=
t again haven't been able to do any experimenting.</p>

<p style=3D"font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">&m=
dash;<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thre=
ad.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href=3D"https://github.com/quic=
wg/base-drafts/issues/134#issuecomment-271552046">view it on GitHub</a>, =
or <a href=3D"https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWbkq6a9V=
PhIw9YHBbi0jSZxX7HjKqoZks5rQ2sXgaJpZM4LfBKv">mute the thread</a>.<img alt=
=3D"" height=3D"1" src=3D"https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AWbkq_T=
HBlaGg7FDUCLjVB33Bd_4-6yMks5rQ2sXgaJpZM4LfBKv.gif" width=3D"1" /></p>
<div itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/EmailMessage">
<div itemprop=3D"action" itemscope itemtype=3D"http://schema.org/ViewActi=
on">
  <link itemprop=3D"url" href=3D"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/is=
sues/134#issuecomment-271552046"></link>
  <meta itemprop=3D"name" content=3D"View Issue"></meta>
</div>
<meta itemprop=3D"description" content=3D"View this Issue on GitHub"></me=
ta>
</div>

<script type=3D"application/json" data-scope=3D"inboxmarkup">{"api_versio=
n":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name"=
:"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/quicwg/base-drafts","title":"=
quicwg/base-drafts","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"http=
s://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/17495839/a5054eac-5d88-11e6=
-95fc-7290892c7bb5.png","avatar_image_url":"https://cloud.githubuserconte=
nt.com/assets/143418/15842166/7c72db34-2c0b-11e6-9aed-b52498112777.png","=
action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-dr=
afts"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@ghedo in #134=
: FTR I raised the issue on the TLS list [here](https://www.ietf.org/mail=
-archive/web/tls/current/msg22065.html), however the main response was \"=
compression is scary\", but it could just be due to lack of details on my=
 part.\r\n\r\nUnfortunately I haven't been able to find the time to do an=
y experimenting (or indeed reply to the mail thread), and haven't heard f=
rom Victor.\r\n\r\nAs for caching, it seems to me RFC7924 is quite a bit =
less flexible than what we have in Google QUIC (namely, you can only cach=
e full chains, not single entries AFAICT, so e.g. you can't just cache in=
termediates), but again haven't been able to do any experimenting."}],"ac=
tion":{"name":"View Issue","url":"https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/i=
ssues/134#issuecomment-271552046"}}}</script>=

----==_mimepart_5874c5178b7b9_fc83fdb2fc231308313c--