RE: Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)

Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> Wed, 02 March 2016 18:41 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 033281B2D1D for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:41:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.008
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.008 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=-0.006, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable
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 O7T6TaPnpm6H for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:41:45 -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 856051B2D1A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:41:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1abBdr-0007fD-Bs for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 18:36:59 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 18:36:59 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1abBdr-0007fD-Bs@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 <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>) id 1abBdk-0007eM-Tb for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 18:36:52 +0000
Received: from mail-by2on0123.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.100.123] helo=na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>) id 1abBdi-00043E-JF for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 18:36:52 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=PHjQLODo+2tRVLoFgtJ/VHs7dwdjI8dGpkL9k4qtTWM=; b=j7nyZCjyKPOIYoQIB3z02fnJ6sFt/UR9GC3C6iAyrwJ93h9nE3NNe8jQS/BjOKW/EwkswhN/LDar7hhB8OZS0CsSOkM/vZmfC6s43PqwRB7gCKxta2qxXola0zRJ2NeU2GADpt6wZZG2+L6gNIcg3aJsx+JQp0vjrGwbowJPabY=
Received: from CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.163.16.28) by CY1PR03MB1373.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.163.16.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.415.20; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 18:36:17 +0000
Received: from CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.16.28]) by CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.16.28]) with mapi id 15.01.0415.024; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 18:36:17 +0000
From: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org>, "httpbis-chairs@ietf.org" <httpbis-chairs@ietf.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Thread-Topic: Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHRdDKMwnSoRKeIX0i7Agk9lI+i759Ge2Kg
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 18:36:16 +0000
Message-ID: <CY1PR03MB1374C907F49681B10F5F4F1987BC0@CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20160302032058.20029.17891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160302032058.20029.17891.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: nostrum.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;nostrum.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [2601:600:8300:3b9a:199c:b3ae:fa6d:4913]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 59341daf-b619-4bf1-8784-08d342c98aa9
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY1PR03MB1373; 5:tMPD0R3mA0RqN3U/cmaHDmiRBBHEekpNtzubvp2jdwmNsUMIvISDK2U2YwXpLmGYMcTiV7f8CGXxMuzA3br+/Jhy4WMAEQJeI89l+6Ix8pHkr5xrjtDsXEyRhu57J7iyv13UVWnbpuQJg552NSF4vA==; 24:hlK8167jgbrsk91ROVG3I4Ei4RN/+d8S5wNZdUUZZv0uLxGvawrvvZUKi9g8i5OWJZJMGpRMFLY60nQG/5CaafJkRIEd6qfgwBQL2ym957w=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR03MB1373;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CY1PR03MB13735A38DD07239C94B0E48D87BC0@CY1PR03MB1373.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:CY1PR03MB1373; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR03MB1373;
x-forefront-prvs: 086943A159
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(52044002)(13464003)(377454003)(86612001)(4326007)(2906002)(189998001)(1096002)(92566002)(1220700001)(102836003)(6116002)(5001960100004)(81156010)(3280700002)(5002640100001)(5003600100002)(230783001)(10090500001)(5001770100001)(586003)(3660700001)(10290500002)(5004730100002)(40100003)(10400500002)(2900100001)(99286002)(54356999)(5008740100001)(76576001)(122556002)(5005710100001)(19580395003)(11100500001)(19580405001)(76176999)(50986999)(33656002)(15975445007)(86362001)(77096005)(74316001)(2950100001)(106116001)(87936001)(3826002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR03MB1373; H:CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 02 Mar 2016 18:36:16.9253 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR03MB1373
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=207.46.100.123; envelope-from=Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com; helo=na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.748, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_NW=0.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1abBdi-00043E-JF b001c1202216c9c930276b7b6f0bb7dd
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: RE: Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CY1PR03MB1374C907F49681B10F5F4F1987BC0@CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31148
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>

2.2 - Hypothetically, a more complex client might cache per network location and revive the cached entries when it returns to the network where it received them.

I think your reading of MAY/SHOULD is correct.  Using Alt-Svc itself is totally optional -- but if you choose to, this is when you SHOULD switch to a given alternative.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben@nostrum.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2016 7:21 PM
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org; Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>; httpbis-chairs@ietf.org; Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>; ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a few minor comments:

= Substantive =

- 2.2, last paragraph:

Why might a client choose not to to remove non-persistent alternatives from cache on a network change? (i.e., why not MUST)?

- 2.4, first 2 paragraphs:

These paragraphs seem to be equivalent to saying “Clients MAY use alternative services; also they SHOULD.”  Or is the intent that, if a client uses alternative services, it SHOULD do so under these conditions?

= Editorial =

- 2.3, first paragraph:
I find "MUST only" constructions to be confusing and sometimes ambiguous due to the implied NOT. I suggest making that explicit:
OLD
   A client MUST only use a TLS-based alternative service if the client also supports TLS Server Name Indication (SNI).
NEW
   A client MUST NOT use a TLS-based alternative service unless the client supports TLS Server Name Indication (SNI).