IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: digest-headers-04: which digest is in the trailer?

Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com> Mon, 08 February 2021 22:40 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 BFD603A1679 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:40:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.77
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.77 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 rK1lusK6ZFvu for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:40:47 -0800 (PST)
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 0FC6E3A1678 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:40:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1l9FAo-00031L-Ia for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 22:38:26 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 22:38:26 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1l9FAo-00031L-Ia@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 <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>) id 1l9FAm-00030a-IX for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 22:38:24 +0000
Received: from mail-ej1-x630.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::630]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>) id 1l9FAl-0007vo-1T for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 22:38:24 +0000
Received: by mail-ej1-x630.google.com with SMTP id i8so28121112ejc.7 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 14:38:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Lp9zSQ2NINZ3SLBhlFQdkypuFy4nJ1aAa/vvOg6nM+c=; b=RaOtZzZ8FVKkIph/nZGtdt8PbeD4T2LNUBYPO4oevvtjNiQ5rc266KCQaY911sPv8y IyJl+h2jjBB9frzTkoM0g4h+zYcnlrsJ5W2a7dWbcdwfC2erABhppO5VioMsjVo12b0q u8FvpPOBr1Ta/u8rYOVdQAaXSQNN4gt0cR8ywamLRvQ1smQD+ulDqDTZ6XHOEGtAK3bQ iCEu5aNiAVDBOUvBvB+K3Nzu4yI3zNpm+ktyVKXNgdL0frDIotIEKlAZFEkI6U/CJY6T IM/PO2yDU2ZfdTpwdJpppn2duVbzkMQKQ0YQtc7/GI1SMBshfob/tvB/9LFKgxW9vb6Z Imgw==
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; bh=Lp9zSQ2NINZ3SLBhlFQdkypuFy4nJ1aAa/vvOg6nM+c=; b=tiFvjmXsWfPgQeHOUpHsXzpyIOuEozHQJBqB72J/Znbs5IUeuIZeq7/OJC82yZ6VCR LQYRCT3A/T//NwczYmzh+IrzyqEI+zugiubGM29AmOiEUxYAzWt2FIGXbLcILJW0c340 udBMwllqmcNz7b+O9nSvOnr4sSQJFHUEaieuY+Q/9yZlxETHbrHjToFkG4fysWC4qhpm Akmw+hIcy83BIC3Xh4mmZqWkco+7yYAici1l70s8GRJt85KUH1I464Py7B4t8MccmT+R lkierdEroWgUh4TxLqN7xsoUj9OqYg+OX0GALCRvD0s5ClpoFBFSx6HfoKGZFANxqV6w IA6w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530pMmoxDq/U5dmLNKA8XNtwhBn88P2dwbFCmV8Lom6GKIllyTBb 4d/aXVmkHCOL5J2oRFfmxA++lFIhd0LZqQhF8vY7sbn4AxU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzoJ+swyRHCEEGANuOFJi/eihgPrpYq4q4E0/lNLqnAaHR/q6MwVyGTUwqpNNWVWwAmsjB1f0EBx6YYe+FkMVY=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3006:: with SMTP id 6mr9911122ejz.448.1612823891624; Mon, 08 Feb 2021 14:38:11 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210208220246.GB1046058@okhta>
In-Reply-To: <20210208220246.GB1046058@okhta>
From: Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 22:38:00 +0000
Message-ID: <CALGR9oZR=8r5xrVE9OaE=t+ocyCykpjrsCLnRzgQaLKDE5kGWA@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000025463305badad396"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::630; envelope-from=lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com; helo=mail-ej1-x630.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com domain=gmail.com), signature is good
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1l9FAl-0007vo-1T 663745063e0018cdbc7a5272c6f12b3b
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: digest-headers-04: which digest is in the trailer?
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CALGR9oZR=8r5xrVE9OaE=t+ocyCykpjrsCLnRzgQaLKDE5kGWA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/38567
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>

Hey Dmitri,

On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 10:06 PM Dmitri Tikhonov <dtikhonov@litespeedtech.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> In the case where the digest is included in the trailer (Section 10.11
> [1]), it may be beneficial for the client to know *which* digest the
> server plans to include in the trailer.  This way, the client, too, can
> calculate it in the streaming manner.  I wonder whether this use case
> has been considered.
>

The use case probably has been considered but I'm not sure there is a
simple solution that can already solve it. If someone knows HTTP-fu and
wants to propose a valid way to do it with existing mechanisms, we could
incorporate it into the example. Failing that, I think a new header,
defined in a standalone document would be path forward.

FWIW draft-thomson-http-mice-03 seems like it was part way to a solution [1]

Cheers
Lucas

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-http-mice-03#section-4.1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email