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

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Mon, 18 January 2016 04:17 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 8AB7B1AD0CC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 20:17:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, 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 5aTuN8x9VXh5 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 20:17:49 -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 502081AD0BE for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 20:17:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aL1Bj-0000Gz-8B for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 04:13:07 +0000
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 04:13:07 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aL1Bj-0000Gz-8B@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 <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1aL1Bd-0000G8-VZ for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 04:13:02 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1aL1Bc-0007HT-EP for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 04:13:01 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [120.149.194.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2063D22E1F4; Sun, 17 Jan 2016 23:12:29 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <569A0B3C.5070707@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:12:27 +1100
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Chris Bentzel <chris@bentzel.net>, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A5E45C1E-BBC2-4E61-8F9E-4FD0E456ABC3@mnot.net>
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> <569562B6.904@cs.tcd.ie> <BN3PR03MB13677294EE2ABFE14D0A56D087CA0@BN3PR03MB1367.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CALaySJ+918e-VO2V6HTK6OnQc0kQrY-YYj=ZToxs3wXxZqjvCg@mail.gmail.com> <56962487.6030709@cs.tcd.ie> <BN3PR03MB1367417E3088E4AD82F9B53887CB0@BN3PR03MB1367.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <5696A318.4010808@cs.tcd.ie> <312E9853-E205-454C-8A71-487FDF357A8D@mnot.net> <CABCZv0potRRAcezS1Q5ZASEyzTuOKtW7sE+Ey=EjxC_+teYr_w@mail.gmail.com> <CY1PR03MB137453C7B22E473C757581C987CD0@CY1PR03MB1374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABCZv0qupdF+nEzPWCsSZGL0NZ3X8LOMfzuz3pGatu426JfAQg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnVSQ=iDrqRE_2y4EPCAsybLmvVXR0yZtn49ryqMTj=pNw@mail.gmail.com> <569A0B3C.5070707@gmx.de>
To: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.233, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1aL1Bc-0007HT-EP 321f63238e163822a6e5c693b609737e
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/A5E45C1E-BBC2-4E61-8F9E-4FD0E456ABC3@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30963
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>

SGTM.


> On 16 Jan 2016, at 8:19 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> On 2016-01-16 02:00, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> Does that suggest an "unless" or a rewrite to something like:
>> 
>> Clients that wish to prevent requests from being correlated (such as
>> those that offer modes aimed at providing improved privacy) SHOULD NOT
>> use alternative services for multiple requests that would not
>> otherwise be allowed to be correlated.
>> ...
> 
> 
> I note that this proposal was triggered by a discussion about text that's not in the current spec. Anyway, is this supposed to go into 9.4 ("Tracking Clients Using Alternative Services", <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-10.html#tracking>), replacing the current statement:
> 
> "Clients concerned by the additional fingerprinting can choose to ignore alternative service advertisements."
> 
> ?
> 
> In which case I'd avoid the normative SHOULD NOT that is conditional on a wish :-). Such as:
> 
> "Clients that wish to prevent requests from being correlated (such as
> those that offer modes aimed at providing improved privacy) can decide not to use alternative services for multiple requests that would not
> otherwise be allowed to be correlated."
> 
> Best regards, Julian

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/