Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used
Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Sun, 04 March 2018 23:29 UTC
Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF405124217 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:29:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Score: 17.3
X-Spam-Level: *****************
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=17.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLACK=20] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lemfVZDlyITE for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:28:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x231.google.com (mail-oi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A459E126B72 for <acme@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:28:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x231.google.com with SMTP id c83so10788170oib.1 for <acme@ietf.org>; Sun, 04 Mar 2018 15:28:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yrYbN0vsXe3YjYd1aCy79n+4soYmRyLRofIs2p8Wq7I=; b=CmI9TZK3LgMwooLiBJv5ldwR96MXB37NckCjQcC7VIHrkZFufz02VPs8Imi9xgOJ++ 14nfXZq/1fvFGB1TqxS5fuT3ebw8B45rZa+zHqAnQlNv+2LfVbqQriliokg9UMWGOknE Iz4v9ZW2FGgfBz1EVHk8/5tO28hYWc/aHtj05dPTegQ6YZTUWQYxcC1IUwvLvNZHX94g azTZBndJAL8dc9+9eym9yQ/ANyTRzUXKysPuc0kldodyxKubBe6xsSn3wyPZFWUhKbLN VcgSQLgy76GmoHdBgJC5yhVq7s7n1IdO/u7RnZ+pOqWR82DzlUeZjTxUYh/AdXHGBSIC GK3Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yrYbN0vsXe3YjYd1aCy79n+4soYmRyLRofIs2p8Wq7I=; b=lO5kve59CCK0xkQNdTbrpw432sl7KkPjO/wwTaRpkOuP/Vjmgsnzz6EGPl/zRXxgq1 PGVELt5AnZwNva2INSsar/um35fqnSfphdKTM9vDA6ULGve6pKGlAFIK64Exl8BopLCM F8rPsmlRQ5GUW+iv0vIvnRWJH+M8py0ZmFGZIwvMpyE89O2XwOxA7t2AGy573hzn+HTu XpYUPsnDF8YZbHcDWrDgIWsYU1d/hU9wDxeYGnS1UdyoMQ7qApd3+lkH1qjoA9KN0tg3 P2NZVD/A4SpSHMm/nxhzybDtoRqf4hVLQ3V8Koqeg4fwBLQzW3bCBrFVzUiUOA8UKUqb /0ew==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7E5TM1+pOJv8gq3QaiRLZsHUs0QkF0mOSacBgoF3G3Hvc8FoD2a 5/2tdZePoudsVzIGD83qwX5IoSgjZW67WSKuyu4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELt2Qmc0m8MtJGQElHMwGphnvVGvGuCA/AxSNQ6DacuOtipCX+GxkPmEm0u9s/QJzBXDttWjGergZNbfPZaT94U=
X-Received: by 10.202.235.133 with SMTP id j127mr8508503oih.346.1520206138738; Sun, 04 Mar 2018 15:28:58 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.16.85 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 15:28:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAL02cgQFvVNEyBEAPsPdAtWK+VL0aPxdDqhZc_yrVLza4keZmg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMmAzEKJhMaUBtCWSNZyGv-f+-edZ-WTq3=WFD_b1bXfvua89A@mail.gmail.com> <20180106001126.GB3076@carrot.tutnicht.de> <CAMmAzELgjpAmVCX6YB0VMvNQV3NH3NDdM_pdcz6d+h=ZO2rJww@mail.gmail.com> <CAMmAzEKMffffrxAihotVWPpqy=LaRkpSJuW9CpSVoQfLQ-nBwQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgRLXkkQECF5ssGh39uFL0xJp-3EODxGSQVzfPuEnE7FgA@mail.gmail.com> <63F4F466-8398-41E6-BD25-5414ADA9D1B3@felipegasper.com> <CAMmAzEKksnuBi0LPHsAsd2qs1brbMqrJBdtsbArTr6HhGrkN+A@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgRrH9fG-E9_oc4naSNvE4igaUcs9wXDfTtCTUCx+c4wbg@mail.gmail.com> <20180304125854.GH2161@carrot.tutnicht.de> <CAMmAzEJ0A2iOd2ASSHGJRfuB6Ss-BaOCXWsxUKUZx9UUzbT1ng@mail.gmail.com> <20180304143300.GI2161@carrot.tutnicht.de> <CAMmAzELuDLp4KxPtLgHp8AoyKGLOOjx4HPSrhDJ=yJ9RytU_vw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgSAQaE0Qd=q3aSEDZdGe0TwyHs60xn-042OhKxu5LHxYA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWKhQ99qHtN8PkyG=6zNbJeGPYstL7Hgek36nR+747oHg@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgQFvVNEyBEAPsPdAtWK+VL0aPxdDqhZc_yrVLza4keZmg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 10:28:58 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUeiZvckTBRZNAv1Psg+ge-xK+y6vhSA4h2Ve_9_Nt8cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Cc: Logan Widick <logan.widick@gmail.com>, Jörn Heissler <acme-specs@joern.heissler.de>, Felipe Gasper <felipe@felipegasper.com>, ACME WG <acme@ietf.org>, Fraser Tweedale <frase@frase.id.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/BqlEHaiqQillJshrH3AIKNEjJ1s>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2018 23:29:01 -0000
That's a bit silly. I'll follow-up with httpbis. I think that's an error, though probably only an error of omission. 7694 was so fixated on solving the content-coding issue, it neglected the obvious accompanying fix. On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:38 AM, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote: > How about Accept? It looks like 7694 gives the server a way to specify > encodings, but not the content type. But 7231 says that Accept only replies > to response media types. > > On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> 415 is for the case where a client provides bad request content, so yes. >> See rfc7694 for details. >> >> 406 is for failed conneg. Not something you expect to see much here. >> >> >> On 5 Mar. 2018 09:25, "Richard Barnes" <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote: >> >> The lengths of the emails in this thread illustrate the complexity risk >> here :) >> >> In the interest of simplicity, I would really like to stick to Flattened >> JSON unless someone has **strong** objections. >> >> Logan, to your point about library compatibility, two notes: (1) it's OK >> if we front-run libraries a little. It's not hard for libraries to upgrade; >> this is only formatting, no crypto changes needed. (2) Empirically, this >> must not be too big a blocker for people, since as Jacob notes, Let's >> Encrypt only supports Flattened JSON right now and they've got a bunch of >> clients talking to them. >> >> As far as headers / response codes: You're correct that 406 is wrong / 415 >> is right. But ISTM that Accept is still the right header to say what is >> right. So the server should return 415+Accept. Copying Thomson to check >> our work here. >> >> --Richard >> >> On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Logan Widick <logan.widick@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> How about this: Specify a default format (either "application/jose" for >>> Compact Serialization, or "application/jose+json" with Flattened >>> Serialization - I have no preference which one), with optional support for >>> other formats if needed? Even with JOSE libraries that don't support all >>> serializations and/or don't provide control over which serialization is >>> used, a programmer would at least need to know (or experimentally find out) >>> if a JSON serialization or if the compact one is being produced. If a JSON >>> serialization is selected as the default, a programmer should be able to >>> convert between the two JSON serializations easily as needed before and/or >>> after using a JOSE library. If a JSON format is declared as the default but >>> the JOSE library only has the compact one, or vice-versa, conversion before >>> and/or after the JOSE library would be more complex but should still be >>> doable with guidance. >>> >>> The directory meta item could be defined as something like: >>> >>> supportedSerializations: An array of supported serialization formats as >>> described in {{jws-serialization-formats}}. If this is not specified, assume >>> that the server only supports [insert selected default here]. >>> >>> Then, the JWS Serialization Formats section could be changed to something >>> like the following: >>> >>> The JSON Web Signature (JWS) specification {{!RFC7515}} contains multiple >>> JWS serialization formats. When sending an ACME request with a non-empty >>> body, an ACME client implementation SHOULD use the HTTP Content-Type >>> {{!RFC7231}} header to indicate which JWS serialization format is used for >>> encapsulating the ACME request payload. >>> >>> Each serialization format defined for use in ACME is described with a >>> content type, and a series of ACME-specific restrictions on root JWS and >>> nested JWS instances. A "root JWS" is a JWS used to encapsulate an entire >>> ACME request payload, and a "nested JWS" is a JWS contained within the ACME >>> request payload (such as the "externalAccountBinding" described in >>> {{external-account-binding}} or the "key-change" object described in >>> {{account-key-roll-over}}). Below are the JWS serialization formats that are >>> defined for use in ACME: >>> >>> [same list as before but with the default format coming first] >>> >>> If no Content-Type is provided, the default serialization type is [insert >>> selected default here]. Servers MUST support [insert selected default here]. >>> [NOTE: If a JSON format is selected as the default, say that a server SHOULD >>> support the other JSON format.] A server MAY support additional >>> serializations, such as [insert serialization(s) not picked here], by >>> including a "supportedSerializations" field in the directory "meta" object >>> as described in {{directory}}. >>> >>> If a server receives a request using a serialization it does not support, >>> the server MUST send a response with HTTP status code 415 (Unacceptable >>> Media Type) and a problem document with error type >>> "unsupportedSerialization". This problem document SHOULD contain a >>> "supportedSerializations" array of strings indicating the acceptable >>> serialization content types. >>> >>> [TODO: If a client uses the General JSON Serialization but it turns out >>> the server only supports the Flattened JSON Serialization (or vice-versa), >>> explain that a 415 response indicates that the client will need to switch >>> JSON formats] >>> >>> [TODO: Insert a sentence or two specifying what happens if a supported >>> serialization is used but the serialization is malformed? Should this be 400 >>> Bad Request + malformed error code + supportedSerializations?] >>> >>> In the examples below, JWS objects are shown in the Flattened JSON >>> serialization, with the protected header and payload expressed as >>> base64url(content) instead of the actual base64-encoded value, so that the >>> content is readable. [Example readability is a very high priority regardless >>> of which serialization format is actually chosen as the default, and the >>> current convention of Flattened JSON + base64url(content) is about as >>> readable as it gets, so I don't think any changes will need to be made here] >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Jörn Heissler >>> <acme-specs@joern.heissler.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 07:45:36 -0600, Logan Widick wrote: >>>> > Good catch. Should it be 415 (Unsupported Media Type) plus which of >>>> > the >>>> > following (or which combination of the following): >>>> > >>>> > - A new problem document field (tentatively named >>>> > "supportedSerializations": an array of media type strings)? >>>> > - A new directory field (tentatively named >>>> > "supportedSerializations": an >>>> > array of media type strings)? >>>> > - Should this go in the directory's "meta" object, or in the >>>> > directory object itself? >>>> > - A HTTP header? >>>> > - Something else? >>>> >>>> I like the directory approach with meta. Then a client could >>>> use this information before sending the first POST. Else the client >>>> would need to change an internal state after receiving the error >>>> message. For my own client, I'm planning to support the OpenPGP smart >>>> card. It takes 3 seconds to generate a signature. If a signature is >>>> wasted to find out that the default serialization is not supported, it >>>> would be annoying. Having to write a configuration file "use compact by >>>> default for CA foo" would be stupid too. >>>> >>>> This, and the problem document field. "supportedSerializations" sounds >>>> fine. >>>> >>>> Should the two features be OPTIONAL? >>>> >>>> I don't like HTTP headers, it's quite complicated to parse them >>>> correctly. >>>> JSON is so much easier. >>>> >>>> >>>> Or... specify that flattened MUST BE used :-) >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Joern Heissler >>> >>> >> >> >
- [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Fraser Tweedale
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Felipe Gasper
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jacob Hoffman-Andrews
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Logan Widick
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Martin Thomson
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Martin Thomson
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Martin Thomson
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Specify which JWS serialization is used Martin Thomson
- [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Felipe Gasper
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Jörn Heissler
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Felipe Gasper
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Matthew D. Hardeman
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Felipe Gasper
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Richard Barnes
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Martin Thomson
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Matthew D. Hardeman
- Re: [Acme] Concerning alternative formats … Felipe Gasper