Re: [Taps] How to handle Protocol stacks that are not equivalent

[Theresa Enghardt <[e-mail]>]

Hi, (trimmed Cc list)

On 23.07.19 16:53, Anna Brunström wrote:
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Taps] How to handle Protocol stacks that are not
> equivalent
>
>  
>
> Yes, that's correct. My interpretation is that being in the candidate
> set already requires equivalence.
>
>  
>
> Same here, seems we all agree on this.
>
Agreed.

However, the equivalence question becomes way more interesting once
you're adding security.

TLS 1.2 is not equivalent to TLS 1.3, therefore you can't race them, the
Architecture clearly says so and I agree.

As the application probably never asked for any specific version -- What
if our TCP stack only supports TLS 1.2 but our QUIC stack offers
basically TLS 1.3? We always take the better version and then fall back
in case this fails? But wouldn't that be racing?

I think this is also an interesting question for the Implementation draft.

Best,
Theresa