Re: [Acme] Signed JSON document / Json Content Metaheader / JSON Container

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Thu, 29 January 2015 00:54 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716451A8A06; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:54:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.666
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
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 9_c_xy-1Q6Em; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:54:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3191A8A04; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:54:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846D0350079; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:54:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=TcVAyb1T4mG26q UTWA0hpD+NSbc=; b=u/y40u7/PwgVReVs2KhUdb7qwxzTh7euYqLynsSecNg0jy sq35e0DbRYCCsK9sP5WQo3mKE3f9Cr8FWNWgrBGue41EMHPUwPB2pJOB6iVEQbAc 2NevLjeHMIHvD6b9vkfY6fDEvZPGv3OGEDrZP7xec28ZXY4bBSUsYMTpUThWA=
Received: from localhost (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 31F4535005B; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:54:02 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 18:54:01 -0600
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Message-ID: <20150129005357.GM3110@localhost>
References: <CAMm+Lwh12jzrH3ZVaS4HTqkNZkteg9mL+n6LYRsj5P1r-Q-DbQ@mail.gmail.com> <20150128224346.GF3110@localhost> <CAMm+LwhJ7Nuxk==T2x+pst020QQb6jc5NWTN6PtGS_YAEWS6Vg@mail.gmail.com> <20150128232002.GK3110@localhost> <CAMm+LwjN_6cbLfq4NAHQ0U=pRjV-ksLDZX+CEBs42m72p5GVJA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwjN_6cbLfq4NAHQ0U=pRjV-ksLDZX+CEBs42m72p5GVJA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/IQ2Vh_U5tLm69lVJH4QdxEMTYCM>
Cc: "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Acme] Signed JSON document / Json Content Metaheader / JSON Container
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 00:54:03 -0000

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 07:50:29PM -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:11:46PM -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> > > > OK, but why not put all of this into the headers anyways?
> > >
> > > Well that is what I suggested in my Content-Signature work and that is
> > > exactly how my code works today. But folk proposed introducing the
> > > signature in the HTTP content segment and that forced me to think about
> > > which approach is better.
> >
> > Your approach looks like a Transfer-Encoding to me.  If that's what it
> > looks like, and that's what it walks like, [and that's what we want,]
> > then that's what it should be.
> 
> 
> Umm, I designed the Chunked transfer encoding. A TE gives the length of
> blobs. This is not a TE.

So it's a new MIME type of signed data?

OK.

> > I meant: why not use whatever JOSE delivered?
> 
> Base64 encoding the content so as to be able to work out the boundaries.
> Blech.

That's what I thought.  Base64 avoidance for bulk sounds good to me.

Nico
--