Re: [apps-discuss] [http-auth] HTTP-Auth BoF in Quebec City Postponed

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 04 October 2011 18:52 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5FC21F8CB9; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.547
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.570, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GiXKVshrdcIE; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcagg.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86C621F8D6A; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948CD67C073; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=vWwed0Cs8DXJSjRvHxtuz 8emWJGGrqRFf0cFCJOD//sLn1+S3URU1uh/GnMwKu1pKaec7FsOoao2D+3JPEyig VNHyrff0J3oDgsiBzOkOeUbmkuzQckZodouPE+65FWp5pJLN2mwl6bY8fLhLMosg a6bKSJzf1gbI0haIBKk0sc=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=VWxjz5emYibkZSyh8prU fnNEhAg=; b=po3WOOM8oL8+c1QG5x3EzRrifmQPbFx0LR/ZPk3p9pNKqOGFJgix ejHOI6iT1UP9HxM7YaPgTPUR5RssCCt6FzyQZLzSmAD1vgL4Fgxeuu6VPJrHCK9Z sd6ZuL5Hcrv0tddxTeBIb1JEowgEPTP/jIjChAZ3G1PceEzKMmM3c/0=
Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a74.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46BBE67C072; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo11 with SMTP id fo11so856924vcb.31 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 11:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.93.139 with SMTP id cu11mr1658081vdb.77.1317754538605; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 11:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.27.68 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAGipQFmN89+Q26AGsocnWbh1nzcH0xgJAC8oZOYVw-cn1L9mGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5FA6AD59-7570-4A85-B6D1-3DC8E42688F1@mnot.net> <234F16BC-9875-474B-95B3-D61E8BE5A6E0@checkpoint.com> <CAK3OfOigCA1Jkv6qgc+kF-43Bavgxdv-twVs6au+B3qWWsbDvA@mail.gmail.com> <4E2CA293.70603@stpeter.im> <CAGipQFmN89+Q26AGsocnWbh1nzcH0xgJAC8oZOYVw-cn1L9mGw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 13:55:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOj5hDQrR3GWY468OHgTKXe3e6ihq1UGENJVgg7V+LpMxA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: "HAYASHI, Tatsuya" <lef.mutualauth@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: "http-auth@ietf.org" <http-auth@ietf.org>, Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org Discuss" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [http-auth] HTTP-Auth BoF in Quebec City Postponed
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 18:52:37 -0000

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM, HAYASHI, Tatsuya
<lef.mutualauth@gmail.com> wrote:
> The cut-off date of BOF proposal requests in IETF Taipei is coming soon.
> Taking account of the recent status of this list, I don't think we
> have a BOF in Taipei. However, I want to improve the authentication in
> the web too, so is there any intention to have a side meeting to
> clarify the scope and the problem?
>
> As a co-author of the problem statement draft by Yutaka Oiwa, I want
> the draft enhanced by other guys familiar with authentication.
> (We are updating a draft!)

We agreed at Quebec not to have a meeting at Taipei.  I thought we all
agreed that it would be counter-productive to have such a meeting with
a significant constituency absent.

What's changed since Quebec?

Nico
--