[Spud] PCP vs. SPUD
Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> Wed, 25 March 2015 21:38 UTC
Return-Path: <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53971A01A5
for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:38:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id QJaUErqWTIM4 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22c.google.com (mail-ig0-x22c.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22c])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81CD71A017D
for <spud@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igbqf9 with SMTP id qf9so37557878igb.1
for <spud@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=KmlsqsjPCQQCX2uOa7USDDhkBzDrsORibK1fPTtnBrE=;
b=AvDMYCpX5vigi9lOnamLQrPOTQzQmpS0ILCIKi++ErKPaVlg4Bsg8Ht8QZtRTRot/a
dQy72uXqIcirfCArfHaopvILz1tRYzPDzPaM0oOC92cuyDU7yHvGeTCIL4vnXPDWLcug
uuO1vOCms6LxPqiTygQIt6kmFqgpeoxuuopKFPYqd8TNgz52qmThPqj2dhfZn3T0bHMM
sJostn4h0N57dDncil7YNEZi2JbF1dsDlyFfhbZwf1C3wMKRbln+0Bzo5WUtOcf75XIV
G1O8uYAGECcHBROWWI/HROpTQO/+ZKAzI4sz2kFXM7WGCh3K+x8tgkRRhcwJ/+m3mxvj
iB/g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.43.69.68 with SMTP id yb4mr34016187icb.96.1427319484064;
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.113.196 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:38:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD62q9XopDJ7PFA9Hz7R2nV6OcwhQA=T=oGwQAN2_0EFPZvwzg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
To: "spud@ietf.org" <spud@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec51b1be9d44847051223b6b2
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/tkVMOKmd5ZpOwCpwL7OHhhMmLd0>
Subject: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>,
<mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>,
<mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 21:38:05 -0000
If we take SPUD's goals at their most minimal, as expressed by Ted, of enabling passage of encrypted traffic through middleboxes, can someone explain why PCP is not sufficient? --aaron
- [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Aaron Falk
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Pal Martinsen (palmarti)
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Eliot Lear
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Aaron Falk
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Eliot Lear
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Spud] PCP vs. SPUD Phillip Hallam-Baker