Re: [TLS] Bikeshedding ECHO

+1 to "ETCH"

Any objections to that or concerns with that?
(Agreed it would be good to finalize this ASAP.)

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 7:03 PM Tommy Pauly <tpauly=
40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> ECHO is more fun to say, but I do see how it can be confusing (sounding
> like some sort of ping) when out of the context of TLS.
>
> To that end, I’d have a minor preference for “ETCH”.
>
> Thanks,
> Tommy
>
> > On May 7, 2020, at 3:52 PM, Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > Erik raises some compelling reasons to change the name from ECHO to...
> something else less confusing or misleading [1]. Candidates from the PR
> include ETCH (Encrypted TLS Client Hello), ECH, and EHELLO. Since the
> HTTPSSVC draft aims for WGLC before IETF 108, it would be good if we got
> this bikeshedding out of the way now. To that end, if you have an opinion
> on the name and whether or not we should change it, please share it!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris (no hat)
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/issues/232
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TLS mailing list
> > TLS@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>