2 ms·
> I think SNI is currently one of the most pragmatic tools to work around ipv4 exhaustion. Pretty much: https://research.cloudflare.com/publications/Fayed2021/
by ignoramous 5y ago
> I think SNI is currently one of the most pragmatic tools to work around ipv4 exhaustion.
Pretty much: https://research.cloudflare.com/publications/Fayed2021/ https://research.cloudflare.com/publications/Fayed2021/
See also, DNS SVC (A/B) records (pseudo NAT at DNS layer); but not many deployments use it or understand it. Note that, SNI as a routing replacement works for TCP nicely without much (user-space) complication. With QUIC, transparently proxying connections isn't all that straight forward.
- anderspitman 5y agoThanks for the link. What exactly are the issues with QUIC? I've wondered if it's possible to do SNI routing with UDP but haven't looked into it yet.
- ignoramous 5y agoQUIC hides and encrypts everything it possibly can, and that includes server and client identities (IPs are inconsequential to a QUIC session which is instead maintained through connection-id(s) exchanged under TLS encryption or is obfuscated away; that is, there is no way for a middleware to analyse a QUIC session / flow without actually MiTMing TLS). More: https://lwn.net/Articles/745590/ https://lwn.net/Articles/745590/