Re: Informal Last Call for draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-04, was: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-04.txt

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Tue, 31 January 2012 01:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@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 07E4011E80E9 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:41:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.455
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.455 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.144, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 NnuW742-JnAH for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:41:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 001D411E80D9 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:41:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Rs2hJ-00066D-My for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:39:49 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <derhoermi@gmx.net>) id 1Rs2h5-00065G-8O for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:39:35 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <derhoermi@gmx.net>) id 1Rs2h3-0004zb-5T for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:39:34 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2012 01:39:06 -0000
Received: from dslb-094-223-178-249.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO HIVE) [94.223.178.249] by mail.gmx.net (mp029) with SMTP; 31 Jan 2012 02:39:06 +0100
X-Authenticated: #723575
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+tq69f4Watv2QYwroRcAxCqBvOfC6y3RV9k+aAZH WBPP4Y63gXQ+vv
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:39:28 +0100
Message-ID: <lbhei7t4229ed7j65v7ggli1nfg2pu59tl@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <20120129152840.10536.93223.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F2567DA.3060608@gmx.de> <visci75v85ndepsfib5qfpdqvsb84m8piu@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <4F26D337.1020507@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4F26D337.1020507@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=213.165.64.23; envelope-from=derhoermi@gmx.net; helo=mailout-de.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Rs2h3-0004zb-5T a45568b289bbe91e67b04356e4ca2690
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Informal Last Call for draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-04, was: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-04.txt
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/lbhei7t4229ed7j65v7ggli1nfg2pu59tl@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/12264
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: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Rs2hJ-00066D-My@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:39:49 +0000

* Julian Reschke wrote:
>On 2012-01-30 12:17, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>> Don't repeat so much of / so literally the Abstract in the Introduction,
>> it's confusing to read the duplicate.
>
>I like it that way :-)

I can understand it's annoying to phrase them differently, and while
Agent Smith might not be around the next corner, but "What, I just
read that" is very distracting nevertheless.

>Or we could revise RFC 2617's definition of "Basic" and move it into a 
>separate document. Technically that would be the cleanest approach, but 
>I fear that doing so would summon those who insist on a complete fix for 
>all HTTP security issues.

Looking at the recent xml-dev thread on Basic, this seems indeed likely.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/