Talk:Protocol ossification

Further expansion potential

Didn't find these in the sources I found, which I'd've liked to have included:

  • More history of the problem. When did people really start paying attention to ossification? What are the major landmark results? When was the term coined? Is there prehistory?
  • What rate of intolerant paths/middleboxes makes a protocol undeployable on the Internet?
  • Linkage to Moxie Marlinspike's essay titled 'The Ecosystem is Moving', and more broadly the topic of protocol evolution & deployability. That might make for an article in its own right if the right sources can be found.

Polyphemus Goode (talk) 09:46, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wire Image

The term "wire image" is used repeatedly - but is nowhere defined. 2601:600:C880:34E0:E5B1:44C3:64DA:2BCE (talk) 06:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I took the term from RFC 8546 as a useful abstraction that basically means all the information that can be gleaned about the communication by participants other than the endpoints. I was thinking it might make sense to turn the redlink blue with a redirect to a new section of communication protocol describing the idea and implications of different design points, viz cleartext wire images are bad for privacy, unauthenticated wire images allow middlebox meddling, but encrypted wire images knock out some presently-useful operational tools and research opportunities. Polyphemus Goode (talk) 10:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.