Re: AD review of draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-10

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 12 January 2016 20:36 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 D63DA1A88A5 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:36:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 ujujR8EIzj3f for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:36:51 -0800 (PST)
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 E6DB91A8898 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:36:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aJ5cB-0008RX-Lq for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:32:27 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:32:27 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aJ5cB-0008RX-Lq@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>) id 1aJ5c4-0008QM-VL for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:32:20 +0000
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([134.226.56.6]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>) id 1aJ5c2-00058O-Ng for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:32:20 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33A85BE75; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:31:53 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9JrWU-lg_7un; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:31:51 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.87.48.83] (unknown [86.41.53.98]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25C2ABE73; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:31:51 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1452630711; bh=In989W3ti7ZTJvADx0R86uiYOFTez57DvGZfkuJl3gs=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=b7Y9BgS5dT3Tb1NQm2zRH0qb7nd3CkSUSxpqPrxG9jR7TFp6hAdiTv9ONOx+V1/7A 900r1n1wUxQTQjXM1EeNg2SoWmVKyssy2TLB5kIOFedLS92xy9vQa36QT2MeO5yyW1 r7bMbrrTAsNZ2xiXboe4jEFu48eIO+I0aKpPYxCw=
To: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
References: <CALaySJK5fYy_JCv0Y7Fs3QpPk95fUxyt272JMc-QUpVKO7_gJA@mail.gmail.com> <56853BCC.7030005@gmx.de> <56927D52.2000106@gmx.de> <CALaySJ+mVOHinmehK2jm3jQaEkXJZ2BRbaY4a5wuw=eOOO-A9Q@mail.gmail.com> <BN3PR03MB13675838E560ED08916D245187C90@BN3PR03MB1367.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <5693DC2E.7010001@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: "draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <569562B6.904@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:31:50 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5693DC2E.7010001@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=134.226.56.6; envelope-from=stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie; helo=mercury.scss.tcd.ie
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.701, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1aJ5c2-00058O-Ng 2d7d96537cbca0504dc6661b9de43df9
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: AD review of draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-10
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/569562B6.904@cs.tcd.ie>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30902
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 11/01/16 16:45, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/01/16 16:34, Mike Bishop wrote:
>> Haven't heard back from Stephen on the port-change issue we wanted
>> him to weigh in on; I sent him a reminder.
> 
> 2nd one worked:-)
> 
> Lemme go back and read the mail. Please hassle me if I've not
> gotten back by tomorrow sometime

So as I understand it (thanks Barry), the issue is whether or not
this text is ok:

  "Clients can reduce this risk by imposing
   stronger requirements (e.g. strong authentication) when moving from
   System Ports to User or Dynamic Ports, or from User Ports to Dynamic
   Ports, as defined in Section 6 of [RFC6335]."

FWIW, I have no problem with that. I'm not sure quite what it's
telling a client to do, but I don't think there's much difference
these days between lower numbered and higher numbered ports. (If
that's wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me:-)

Note that I've not read the rest of the document, just that bit.

Cheers,
S.

> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: barryleiba@gmail.com
>> [mailto:barryleiba@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba Sent: Sunday,
>> January 10, 2016 9:20 AM To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 
>> Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org; HTTP Working Group
>> <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Subject: Re: AD review of
>> draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-10
>>
>>>>> I don't think this is a 2119 "MAY": what *else* can it do?  You
>>>>> have no other guidance about which alternative alternative to
>>>>> pick, so....  I think this should just say, "it chooses the
>>>>> most suitable...."
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. I haven't changed that yet as it affects normative
>>>> language but I will unless somebody wants to defend it soonish.
>>>
>>> <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/a9df1e33703a2cb46c9b
>>>
>>>
> 441bfca5bbc04fff80d1>
>>
>> Nice.  Is this the last of the updates, or are we still working on
>> any?  Whenever you're ready to post a new I-D version, I'll give it a
>> check and request last call.
>>
>> Barry
>>
> 
>