Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-legally-restricted-status

Ted Hardie <> Wed, 30 September 2015 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B851A88F1 for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.011
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b2MHfjNRmCNY for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6306D1A88F6 for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1ZhMKT-0007ut-CD for; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:42:13 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:42:13 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <>
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1ZhMKM-0007uC-Fc for; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:42:06 +0000
Received: from ([]) by with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1ZhMKI-0007Qc-Ea for; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:42:05 +0000
Received: by qgez77 with SMTP id z77so43743647qge.1 for <>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=7G17KEOiDOROj8EVqz/iqUT+g4XFboex5yFhGckb4Io=; b=GxLHkGMgb9+f9oDwo/Erxo+P9vG8TC5LaJlO5+q/PXgEAM4jTKfbKoH8UZjkiPVPb3 U91XOFT5z/UU/yv9ycWP/cohScKaWYWbuTlQRjRYgI2vwPNkTCIfUBS4ezt1BmyuOUBZ zxLMv3/W0qWkfu1wrr/iJMDhuyS5Mj04f6QhA0gGcVrnKi81R8niDf/ejkGfV6jLQ8Ki n86JB8dYR6zgy6dmKSiXEqUpg8HkLwMmWMr9//tO06yoV0YXSBDzxje9EJFumzaxrdbf WPqRilomx8Vqv19T6hGS5/EDEgam91LtaEpEH6BIlZI7z3qL9bTMdOIregbXoGnmR5a4 dsZw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id f63mr6791692qhe.66.1443638496186; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:41:36 -0700
Message-ID: <>
From: Ted Hardie <>
To: Amos Jeffries <>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114235fcbfd9340520fb473b"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=;;
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.221, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: 1ZhMKI-0007Qc-Ea c76b23e14a502110730022c6140fa968
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-legally-restricted-status
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailing-List: <> archive/latest/30290
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Amos Jeffries <> wrote:

> On 30/09/2015 4:29 p.m., Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Section 1:
>  "for use when a server operator has a received a legal demand to deny
> access to a resource"
> This is a lot more restrictive than what I understood was being agreed
> to. This phrasing implies that a specific-URL DMCA type notice is
> required before the status may be used.
​For what it is worth, I did not read that to mean that the legal demand
was specific to a resource, merely that it covered a resource.  So, for
example, a blanket legal demand that all images containing a picture of the
King of country X be restricted from display outside of country X could
result in this status code being used, even if country X did not specify
each resource containing such a picture by URL.

​I think the current text is right, in other words, but I wouldn't object
to making a change that clarified it.  Perhaps:

"for use whenever a server operator has received a legal demand to deny
access to a resource or to a set of resources which includes the requested

I'm honestly not sure it's needed, but I think that would be harmless to


Ted Hardie
(Not speaking for anyone here)​