3 ms·
It's easy to see why, without the benefit of hindsight, one might think that the minimal approach was to have the same extensions apply to both DTLS and TLS.
by caf 13y ago
It's easy to see why, without the benefit of hindsight, one might think that the minimal approach was to have the same extensions apply to both DTLS and TLS.
- EvanAnderson 13y agoI don't know where to go look (mailing list archives? meeting minutes?) to find any discussion about this extension (I'm woefully ignorant of Internet standards processes), but it would certainly be nice to review that discussion. Given the rather dramatic differences that need to occur in a protocol designed to work over unreliable versus reliable transport, though, it seems like a bad idea to try to keep "parity" between DTLS and TLS. I can see how somebody might see it as "elegant" to do so, but I'd argue they're different animals solving different problems.
- ralfd 13y agoMaybe the payload is used for a sequential id number?