You all seem like the sort of people who might know the answer to this, so: any idea why https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-balfanz-tls-obc-01 never went anywhere? I independently reinvented it yesterday and now I'm curious what I'm utterly missing that left smarter people than me deciding it wasn't a good idea 14 years ago
@mjg59 Look at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/6O8UTvxsPV85iaKITi_wHQgur-A/ to see some problems Google identified.
@mjg59 According to a mailing list post <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/Sh8rImy-e7Dd7Prq503QVzoxmrM/>, it eventually became RFC8471.
@chrysn Ok that makes sense, except token binding was then weird and complicated enough that Chrome removed it the same year the RFC was published, so I guess I want to know why the draft turned into this weirder thing
(I am looking for actual informed answers, not suppositions!)
@mjg59 this may be your best post ever
@mjg59 well this is just an observation, I wouldn't assume your missing something, though that is good introspection and critical thinking. A tool or technique can often be good fit for specific use case but not ideal for others for lot of reasons not related tot he quality of it: logistics/econ/scaling/etc but sure you know that
