xtls-rprx-vision VS. xhttp stream‑one

[Anderhar]

Am I right that the stream‑one mode of XHTTP is more vulnerable than xtls-rprx-vision, particularly when combined with Reality and domain stealing? I am especially referring to the TLS-in-TLS problem, against which XHTTP opposes the uplink/downlink separation, which is not present in the stream‑one mode. At first glance, it seems that xtls-rprx-vision is still superior when it comes to Reality without the uplink/downlink separation applied.

A more or less similar question has already been raised here, but unfortunately, machine translation from Chinese doesn't quite preserve the meaning.

[Anderhar]

@RPRX , could you please respond based on the current state of things? Six months later, I’m still encountering people with the same questions:

• Is XHTTP-Rality-Vision a better or weaker alternative to TCP-Rality-Vision?
• Is stream-one prone to TLS-in-TLS problem, or actually not?
• Is VLESS Encryption mandatory or advisable for XHTTP-Rality-Vision?

Due to a lack of official documentation, some still consider this combo totally impossible, while others are already promoting ready-made configs with it. There’s a belief that XHTTP-Rality-Vision is the better choice in my jurisdiction, but some are still afraid to use it because of TLS-in-TLS. The 3X-UI developers also refuse to enable the Flow selection for XHTTP.
And all of that is amplified by the ubiquitous AI-slop, which repetitively spins the same arguments over and over.

I think you could kill all this madness with a single brief and clear appendix to the main document.