5 ms·

I don't think this is a correct assessment. Domain fronting / boring domains can still be blocked, and this is precisely what caused the whole Signal / AWS issu

I don't think this is a correct assessment. Domain fronting / boring domains can still be blocked, and this is precisely what caused the whole Signal / AWS issue recently. This is a commercial risk to the domain holder, and to any organisation with shareholders it makes sense for them not to want their domain to be used for this purpose. The engineers are looking for an alternative solution which pleases both camps: no more domain fronting, and no more possible blocking of domains by adversaries. I think it's a bit idealist to say that if they're serious about making sites unblockable, they should put their commercial interests aside. This will not happen. But they are working on an alternative solution where both parties (engineers and shareholders) are happy, and I can only support that.

repolfx 8y ago
It's the same thing. How do you think encrypted SNI will play out? The IP address is still available, so this only helps if the IP address you're connecting to hosts many domains, some of which are desirable to the censors to keep unblocked. In practice this means big CDNs and hosting services, of which there are only a few. The reason they stopped domain fronting wasn't technical, it was business related. If these engineers can't win the internal political battles to keep domain fronting working, what makes them think they can win the exact same battle this time around?
- stingraycharles 8y ago
  Blocking entire IP blocks is a much more crude weapon and definitely an improvement over the current situation. What you're presenting is a logical fallacy; just because the proposed solution doesn't tackle all the problems you want solved, doesn't mean it's not worth doing.