Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST comments)
"Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com> Sun, 09 January 2011 22:15 UTC
Return-Path: <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
X-Original-To: alto@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: alto@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B66A53A6847 for <alto@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:15:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.542
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3j12zVK1hM8y for <alto@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:15:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from csmailgw2.commscope.com (csmailgw2.commscope.com [198.135.207.242]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0A83A6835 for <alto@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 14:15:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.86.20.103] ([10.86.20.103]:21916 "EHLO ACDCE7HC2.commscope.com") by csmailgw2.commscope.com with ESMTP id S509905Ab1AIWSB (ORCPT <rfc822; alto@ietf.org>); Sun, 9 Jan 2011 16:18:01 -0600
Received: from SISPE7HC1.commscope.com (10.97.4.12) by ACDCE7HC2.commscope.com (10.86.20.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.137.0; Sun, 9 Jan 2011 16:18:01 -0600
Received: from SISPE7MB1.commscope.com ([fe80::9d82:a492:85e3:a293]) by SISPE7HC1.commscope.com ([fe80::8a9:4724:f6bb:3cdf%10]) with mapi; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 06:17:58 +0800
From: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
To: Richard Alimi <rich@velvetsea.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 06:17:56 +0800
Thread-Topic: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST comments)
Thread-Index: AcuvACzPrvHw1SLCT5Gll+mkMFWz8ABSoc2g
Message-ID: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F5258E9F@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
References: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F336538D@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <AANLkTi=MzkpVSw5Nvet2GLdaEGFYCKo++eKbZbG5QCj3@mail.gmail.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F50ED506@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <AANLkTimvg4A8zB0SH4ZLfbCBN7sFyLCcL5Fwnvzu6iGk@mail.gmail.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F50ED652@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <AANLkTi=BduAW0ToYr-4TC8KfewAK9Kp8KghORKpW1CaE@mail.gmail.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03F5258CDC@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <AANLkTimg4ANpShyB6rN7ebdqKL-oQVEKdzR-LKjODqFS@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimg4ANpShyB6rN7ebdqKL-oQVEKdzR-LKjODqFS@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BCN: Meridius 1000 Version 3.4 on csmailgw2.commscope.com
X-BCN-Sender: Martin.Thomson@andrew.com
Cc: "alto@ietf.org" <alto@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST comments)
X-BeenThere: alto@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Application-Layer Traffic Optimization \(alto\) WG mailing list" <alto.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto>
List-Post: <mailto:alto@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto>, <mailto:alto-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 22:15:50 -0000
On 2011-01-08 at 17:49:16, Richard Alimi wrote: > > CMS (formerly S/MIME; RFC 5652 from memory) might work, though I'm > certainly not across all the complexities. > > Thanks for pointing this out. Looking at it briefly, my understanding > of the encoding is that we either define an alternate query (or add a > query-string parameter to each query) to request signed ALTO > Responses, or make all ALTO Responses be encapsulated using CMS (which > still allows them to be signed or unsigned). If we were to make use > of CMS, of those two options, the latter seems better to me. OpenSSL > appears to support CMS so there is certainly existing library support > out there already. You could simply use conneg and include one format by default and the other if Accept headers indicated a preference for it. --Martin
- [alto] Reprise of REST comments Thomson, Martin
- Re: [alto] Reprise of REST comments Richard Alimi
- Re: [alto] Reprise of REST comments Thomson, Martin
- Re: [alto] Reprise of REST comments Richard Alimi
- Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST c… Thomson, Martin
- Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST c… Richard Alimi
- Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST c… Thomson, Martin
- Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST c… Richard Alimi
- Re: [alto] Redistribution (was: Reprise of REST c… Thomson, Martin