IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cice-02: (with DISCUSS)

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> Thu, 03 September 2015 10:12 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8132E1B3BB2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 03:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 6wDbwfjyAi7j for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 03:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 428E81B36AF for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 03:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1ZXRT1-0003nP-Oc for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:10:03 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:10:03 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1ZXRT1-0003nP-Oc@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>) id 1ZXRSw-0002h6-V4 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:09:58 +0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de ([217.91.35.233]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>) id 1ZXRSu-0001ad-Vi for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:09:58 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.29] (unknown [5.10.171.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.greenbytes.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49D3E15A01E5; Thu, 3 Sep 2015 12:09:32 +0200 (CEST)
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
References: <20150902153943.26198.21461.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <9F69E58B-58CA-48BB-AFBE-01E50840512C@mnot.net> <55E79BD0.4030707@cs.tcd.ie> <55E80971.9070905@greenbytes.de> <55E8172B.4030203@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@pobox.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Message-ID: <55E81C65.7010504@greenbytes.de>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 12:09:41 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55E8172B.4030203@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.91.35.233; envelope-from=julian.reschke@greenbytes.de; helo=mail.greenbytes.de
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1ZXRSu-0001ad-Vi 38b0fe9fabbdbec3170283a61c4b25e7
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-cice-02: (with DISCUSS)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/55E81C65.7010504@greenbytes.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30169
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>

On 03.09.2015 11:47, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> Hi Julian,
>
> On 03/09/15 09:48, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2015-09-03 03:01, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/09/15 01:52, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>>> Something like this, perhaps?
>>>>     http://httpwg.github.io/specs/rfc7540.html#rfc.section.10.6
>>>
>>> Yes and no.
>>>
>>> No. The URL above is for HTTP/2 and this is a header usable in
>>> HTTP/1.1 so is not the same. Adding this to a system that is
>>> currently safe wrt BREACH is also perhaps not the same as doing
>>> HTTP/2 from scratch and ending up safe wrt BREACH.
>>
>> Note that the spec doesn't really introduce compression for
>> client->server. This feature has been around for ages. All the spec does
>> is make feature discovery and diagnostics easier.
>
> I don't understand your last sentence above. Isn't this a signal
> that will cause request compression to be turned on in cases when
> it wasn't previously? If not, then I at least misread the text.
> If so, then the "All" in your sentence doesn't seem correct.

It may lead to more compression to be used; but compression can (and is) 
used without this feature.

> ...

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email