Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-auth-info

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 20 February 2015 04:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ietf.org@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 D94AD1A6F14 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:20:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.612
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.612 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 4Quzuvnj_yy4 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:20:23 -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 B44FE1A6F10 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:20:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YOf0L-0007v8-0a for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 04:15:53 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 04:15:53 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YOf0L-0007v8-0a@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1YOf06-0007ty-P5 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 04:15:38 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1YOf05-0003wK-09 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 04:15:38 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.29] (unknown [59.167.195.195]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F333F22E261; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 23:15:12 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <54E48791.2010303@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:15:08 +1100
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9A045598-8F9D-4F8D-B902-F7187D47FD97@mnot.net>
References: <0E4872BF-EBCB-42C0-9BF9-8BC179C1BDDA@mnot.net> <54E48791.2010303@crf.canon.fr>
To: Hervé Ruellan <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
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=-2.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.773, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YOf05-0003wK-09 eb5f1be610860d168d353d85a1274a14
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-httpbis-auth-info
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/9A045598-8F9D-4F8D-B902-F7187D47FD97@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28857
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>

Now <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/49>.

Cheers,


> On 18 Feb 2015, at 11:37 pm, Hervé Ruellan <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr> wrote:
> 
> I think the purpose of the headers should be made more consistent across the document.
> In the Introduction, they are used to "return additional information during or after authentication", while in 3, the Authentication-Info header is used to "communicate additional information regarding the successful authentication".
> 
> DIGEST use it in an optional manner, to convey additional information after a successful authentication.
> Scram is using it in a mandatory manner, to finalize the authentication, by conveying information for authenticating the server.
> 
> I think that Authentication-Info should be used by the server once the client is authenticated (i.e. the status code is not 401), to either convey additional information or finalize the authentication.
> 
> I created a pull request in this direction:
> https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/47
> 
> Hervé.
> 
> On 02/10/2015 11:59 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> Everyone,
>> 
>> Julian believes (with his editor hat on) that this is ready. As discussed, this is a simple document to pull the Authentication-Info and Proxy-Authentication-Info header fields out of 2617, so that they’re not associated with a particular authentication scheme (thereby avoiding lots of scheme-specific headers).
>> 
>> Therefore, this is the announcement of WGLC for:
>>  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-auth-info-02
>> 
>> Please review the document carefully, and comment on this list.
>> 
>> WGLC will end on 25 February.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

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