Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 22 October 2014 16:03 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05971ACDBB for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:03:12 -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 BeRyD-jZqdS7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C500F1ACDB2 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XgyKi-0002Ig-BG for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:00:20 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:00:20 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XgyKi-0002Ig-BG@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>) id 1XgyKb-0001CO-0Q for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:00:13 +0000
Received: from [134.226.56.6] (helo=mercury.scss.tcd.ie) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>) id 1XgyKZ-0005qI-QS for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:00:12 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4789DBE11; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:59:44 +0100 (IST)
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 oexEj20DCVnr; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:59:43 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.12] (unknown [86.41.59.37]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 16B12BE0D; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:59:43 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <5447D46E.5030800@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:59:42 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <5447BAE5.2040104@cs.tcd.ie> <CABkgnnUJg=YtP9KScgxk3JFREk-SPw+G29xp7qSi8OX18uPgnA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUJg=YtP9KScgxk3JFREk-SPw+G29xp7qSi8OX18uPgnA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: none 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=-2.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-4.087, RDNS_NONE=1.274
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1XgyKZ-0005qI-QS f5df5e6c46473f87cde8a5a47b58427e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/5447D46E.5030800@cs.tcd.ie>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/27686
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 22/10/14 16:09, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 22 October 2014 07:10, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote: >> - section 2: I don't like the auth scheme name - this >> should work without X.509. I'd suggest "TLSClientAuth" >> would be a better thing to use. > > I was aiming for a tight scope, clearly you would like to expand this. > I'm not fundamentally opposed to that, but it's a lot more work. Well, not necessarily a lot, but sure I guess it might make most sense to see what'll be needed so that HTTP/2.0+TLS1.3 can do at least as well as but hopefully better than the kind(s) of client auth possible with HTTP/1.1+TLS1.2. And then do that. I suspect the embedded/small-devices might make a non-X.509 based approach worthwhile though. S.
- draft-thomson-httpbis-cant Stephen Farrell
- Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant Ilari Liusvaara
- Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant Martin Thomson
- Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant Stephen Farrell
- Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant Stephen Farrell
- Re: draft-thomson-httpbis-cant Martin Thomson