3 ms·
I'm really interested to know how far we could push performance, encryption/security, features, etc if we didn't care about legacy systems or breaking current s
by FridgeSeal 5y ago
I'm really interested to know how far we could push performance, encryption/security, features, etc if we didn't care about legacy systems or breaking current setups.
What are we missing out on, because of the refusal to let go of pointless legacy systems?
- tyingq 5y agoYeah, that's an interesting question. If we had, for example, moved to IPV6 only some time ago...what innovations would have followed on that more solid ground, no NAT, etc. Or perhaps on a smaller timescale, just pushing ESNI as a non-negotiable thing.
- josephcsible 5y ago> just pushing ESNI as a non-negotiable thing Well, ECH instead of eSNI now, but yes, I would have loved this. Since browsers are all going to be willing to fall back to sending the website name in cleartext, anyone evil enough to be willing to do censorship or surveillance will just block eSNI and ECH.
- jayd16 5y agoNo more middle box caching. Maybe that's pointless, maybe not.
- hogrider 5y agoThis is what makes me think they should mandate an expiry date for this infrastructure stuff, this is good programmable obsolescence.