Re: Request for Authenticated but not Encrypted Traffic

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

Both of you are assuming a request/response paradigm.

That is pretty much the only model we have been using but it isn't the only
model and it is a straightjacket.

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 7:44 PM Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
> On 9/30/2022 4:30 PM, Randy Armstrong (OPC) wrote:
> >    *   Sure, we could design a presentation layer on top of QUIC. I
> think it is better to design a transport/presentation layer for the problem
> space and then see how we might make use of QUIC.
> >
> > Not quite sure why you make a big deal about this. OPC UA supports the
> kinds of operations you described but the complex operations are broken
> into multiple request-response pairs for transport. All OPC UA needs is a
> full duplex channel that allows responses to be returned in any order. I
> would imagine that any other protocol built on QUIC would do the same.
> That's exactly the way DNS over QUIC is designed. Full duplex channel
> (QUIC connection) allowing for series of transactions. Each transaction
> request (from the client) is mapped to a new duplex stream stream;
> response come back on the reverse part of that stream; responses to
> transactions arrive in any order.
> > The important question is: does QUIC have any inherent limitations that
> would make it difficult to implement complex operations over top of QUIC?
>
> No.
>
> You have to pay attention to the management of connections, how to
> resume connections after they break, etc. But that's pretty standard
> when designing a distributed application.
>
> -- Christian Huitema
>
>
>