Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7232 (5236)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 27 August 2020 12:42 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744623A0C2F for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 05:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 NJpwPHdL9loW for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 05:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D003F3A0C9B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 05:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1kBHCJ-0007af-Iv for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:40:07 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:40:07 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1kBHCJ-0007af-Iv@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <barryleiba@gmail.com>) id 1kBHCI-0007Zi-1e for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:40:06 +0000
Received: from mail-io1-f41.google.com ([209.85.166.41]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <barryleiba@gmail.com>) id 1kBHCG-0004oW-E6 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:40:05 +0000
Received: by mail-io1-f41.google.com with SMTP id s1so5592485iot.10 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 05:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zNdoyGEtTzpvAVKbM3mVb6NL7izjXNaV59Salm84XV8=; b=Dd5SP3uhlFrKMedH1ngxHu0MR2Wbm88Ij6IMHo4HvBKVOfa0MfMz0SiQs1C9kqMW9B wyy4l2CV0Nf//2GcQb1lA21wzPA65JIIOWeEQL5wkHbyfzwSMuBLGyuNQ1JMkrdslx/F Bcs60Gk8utTcUfXIYUw/Gv1DlhBL7WnaGN8dkYF7qugJwA9x45uL77NvQSTVDjJuxaeT 9cX+mCnkAVCj/hniyEnvt4wLYDcScagR0BuvGFhtH0OuqsPgbKPLmzBrbBjhbfmmjw8W S04/VRd2aodT3lYGDpNMF/68+3XNlWOo0pIf9Xsn0XomXI3oc81jik0ItlSGoAsbofby BnQw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530kWnp8dzStlTiD+Q0OqJPnHraWVA/R/CXoWe3k40UD6BdY2uJv RJ9Yk0oIAcuhzsqyDIwamBV7V0/+osiCc4wzIYA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIRXk6qAeNf2e85F6TTIZf5r0MLFS8lx5betV3lV2Hz5BLKijjDC4Mo07NglD5z78slWCmRd38uTwYw4uB7Fo=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:c506:: with SMTP id s6mr5342288jam.104.1598531993285; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 05:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20180116155124.07618B81F2B@rfc-editor.org> <55475510-2367-435F-8719-77DFBACADE5C@gbiv.com> <1516134882.3375943.1237594864.4C01254F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <991B2144-B092-4CD0-B6F1-6B66E550FC5E@mnot.net> <f7387a3a-a46e-dd11-d0e1-01a68406587a@gmx.de> <5526CD1C-1987-47BC-9C3C-B211E98FD81B@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <5526CD1C-1987-47BC-9C3C-B211E98FD81B@mnot.net>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:39:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CALaySJJpq5=Nw3F7sR8nM0YOGTOP42Ec7kK6BXO7LHLAXTiHPA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.166.41; envelope-from=barryleiba@gmail.com; helo=mail-io1-f41.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1kBHCG-0004oW-E6 541294e1668a2bb39e6e3d0759f0f09b
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7232 (5236)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CALaySJJpq5=Nw3F7sR8nM0YOGTOP42Ec7kK6BXO7LHLAXTiHPA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37963
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

> +1 - Barry, can we please mark this as REJECTED?

Done.

Barry

> > On 20 Aug 2020, at 4:22 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> > Am 29.01.2018 um 02:00 schrieb Mark Nottingham:
> >> FWIW, I think the source of confusion here is taking this statement out of context:
> >>
> >> """However, if a resource has distinct representations that differ only in their metadata, such as might occur with content negotiation over media types that happen to share the same data format, then the origin server needs to incorporate additional information in the validator to distinguish those representations."""
> >>
> >> The complete paragraph is:
> >>
> >> """There are a variety of strong validators used in practice. The best are based on strict revision control, wherein each change to a representation always results in a unique node name and revision identifier being assigned before the representation is made accessible to GET. A collision-resistant hash function applied to the representation data is also sufficient if the data is available prior to the response header fields being sent and the digest does not need to be recalculated every time a validation request is received. However, if a resource has distinct representations that differ only in their metadata, such as might occur with content negotiation over media types that happen to share the same data format, then the origin server needs to incorporate additional information in the validator to distinguish those representations."""
> >>
> >> I.e., the statement is being made in the context of generating strong validators based only upon the message body, when the headers might also change.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >
> > We tracked this in <https://github.com/httpwg/http-core/issues/163> but
> > then decided not to make a change.
> >
> > I *believe* we should thus reject this erratum.
> >
> > Best regards, Julian
> >
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>