Honestly, I think I prefer SSH's key exchange over TLS.
But then again, they protect different sorts of things.
RFC 4255 sort of makes that moot though, by publishing the server's public key fingerprint hash in the DNS record. Still, if you force a handshake with an unknown domain, DNS is easy to poison as well.
Would SPDY be better off as being considered a new type of proxy protocol to something like squid that could maintain and cache data instead of a server access protocol?
Also, most people tend to forget that encryption isn't mandatory for SSH data channels.
There's no reason why you couldn't pass HTTP/1.1 as is over a SSH channel to a named subsystem.
And sshttpd is as good a name as any, I suppose.
Though, I must ask...
I am one of those crazy bastards with hundreds of open tabs across multiple monitors.
Right now, most of them lay dormant, eating only my own resources.
How can I justify maintaining an open channel to each of these hundreds of sites and servers when I can only realistically balance about six in view?
(TooManyTabs for Firefox helps a bit...)
How many more out there are there like me that care?
How many more that won't care how many resources they abuse?
It's sort of rhetorical and doesn't really require a response, however, I am still curious as to other's viewpoints and opinions.