Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites
Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Mon, 18 November 2013 08:43 UTC
Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
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 DCD1411E8162 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:43:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 nB2-kid4zjRU for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:43:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ob0-x234.google.com (mail-ob0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 265A411E80FA for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:43:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id vb8so6575173obc.39 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:42:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Fc1vKjx8ji8mDJTuxUu+w2N6Ams9NkOoBNIpG6qvgXw=; b=f5lGuU6wVZMH/3hdrIzKkCzhD/siZ9twF3fHqik9mBf52e3G7yHZi4joE2liHC8eMC xtS3mYPFhOZf+CNmc81FUIzbsPNrZBCxWKGZBAmRNKG0jnyXjuunMgnaxhVzET1zlPnB oCtbVG0JURLqhQzjt4JV8AsyNw2hHTkKrL210=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Fc1vKjx8ji8mDJTuxUu+w2N6Ams9NkOoBNIpG6qvgXw=; b=Iv6s6Gt84c3CRL9rRrLygmmut3Zuo8zMCn8FNUAsnRVQvzoClZnVRdS45+Pas+2q4h d2zptdabyvf401uoYwPdlrdU4Po4AZj5wzRKP0THcoMpR2omAHv8UVshakuF6RmDscLB z97mwINVTyQJ+Du2+4uSXQMB3tIOGAk+teXDsM/2WokOohnhFiOZx/VPzNPtIQZD0Kbf 4/s7A0t3wtrwvSbvgn4zdo4qmuYxOsk2yVxhZNt5L5Kq3OI8s/1QXAOcwZVawu1G+ENB KHFHRITXPsQblTtyqTPsbv1tM0xJ34LfSycuaBS4w2/HdcMIKN/Ig7628N14zWVTRyXQ PeDQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnYNldcxte9heYwrKMSMfLPjhCZ9wmb2KD6yQdlJPPpyjuWe5S+BZrz7vkfM6szntEs1XWA
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.62.172 with SMTP id z12mr19097926oer.4.1384764179562; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:42:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.121.97 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:42:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <37f8fec05d4d1acc999ab77a925c88e0.1384754521@squirrel.mail>
References: <52891184.6080707@mathemainzel.info> <37f8fec05d4d1acc999ab77a925c88e0.1384754521@squirrel.mail>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 08:42:59 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzzjcXLOfo9c3fMYqyt6pO00NS+L89Hr0CA75922DTFEjA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: "Walter H." <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2097605543a04eb6f893e"
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites
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: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 08:43:01 -0000
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Walter H. <walter.h@mathemainzel.info>wrote: > > Bug corrected, the example certificates were wrong. > > Filename: draft-hoehlhubmer-https-addon > Revision: 04 > > I've skimmed this quickly, and what I think you've done here is reinvent DANE, which is specified in RFC 6698. I don't *think* you're adding anything new, here, but I do think it's always interesting when someone independently arrives at roughly the same concept. I'd encourage you to read through RFC 6698, and see if there's any differences between your approaches that should be addressed. I'd suggest you probably don't want to invest too much more time in your own approach, though. Dave.
- [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Walter H.
- Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Walter H.
- Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Walter H.
- Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Dave Cridland
- Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Walter H.
- Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Dave Cridland
- Re: [apps-discuss] Add-on for HTTPS websites Walter H.