IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com> Fri, 14 September 2018 15:18 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 0F921130EF7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.66
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.66 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sendgrid.me
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 f6PtOomDkhyO for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:18:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [IPv6:2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:38]) (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 AB578130EC3 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:18:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1g0pnn-000539-50 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:14:35 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:14:35 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1g0pnn-000539-50@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4c]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <bounces+1568871-208f-ietf-http-wg=w3.org@sendgrid.net>) id 1g0pnh-00052W-2r for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:14:29 +0000
Received: from o1.31pqt.s2shared.sendgrid.net ([167.89.100.227]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <bounces+1568871-208f-ietf-http-wg=w3.org@sendgrid.net>) id 1g0pnf-0002U6-N7 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:14:28 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sendgrid.me; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:subject:to:cc:content-type; s=smtpapi; bh=D8tF16PhNewFFnzMm/SSNkMk3qQ=; b=IjxFh3gfUEsQk17cMp ic+5ezUv3nW1KbhUuU3xX1s/gJQkfTQwEz7o2jiVqxHNsAFgDStQQIpS0ydPZHYS lBGkdk3IMRHkjSIjQa3TmFNcaLbXBRiIoqTcdjxZbiKagmQdEiRsSZ5IXhYMvuik MAXWtqbZxo8j7gTtEgn6XmvmU=
Received: by filter0072p3las1.sendgrid.net with SMTP id filter0072p3las1-21978-5B9BD03D-34 2018-09-14 15:14:05.809063747 +0000 UTC m=+31169.155106316
Received: from mail-ot1-f51.google.com (mail-ot1-f51.google.com [209.85.210.51]) by ismtpd0002p1las1.sendgrid.net (SG) with ESMTP id fQoJ9ZMsTrqncJ4EHrnrCA for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:14:06.327 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ot1-f51.google.com with SMTP id a19-v6so4903444otl.12 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:14:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51D5W13EvBsFNAPN3LQe9yzn+eIw2jKNQgIdOuM22xg+xzZXhWnd iBUSci9Lg1BVLHYy5MdW2XuyGKPEFuTTfK5woTg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbaA7xpZ5DWMHb3ehmnpRx66kPVDmLMihrf8jPlk4aKfhxoWP0ItuNnatSrmgUMslsEl2QfjPqBT7rNtVELe74=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:1924:: with SMTP id j36-v6mr4529042ota.104.1536938044808; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a4a:5012:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:14:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <153682169290.9530.10396840495307914328.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <153682169290.9530.10396840495307914328.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:14:06 +0000
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAOdDvNobqcQ9VEpQ1V+AoMoT390eCc4+O2YXpHAqjwdUXO8Tag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNobqcQ9VEpQ1V+AoMoT390eCc4+O2YXpHAqjwdUXO8Tag@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct@ietf.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000033ece40575d6464c"
X-SG-EID: YLWet4rakcOTMHWvPPwWbcsiUJbN1FCn0PHYd/Uujh4ILwNaIllB22FanndbCzfE2sm1AdV2xv0SuJ vF8lUfrDh74DPcl0d2qbtysMh+w6hhiGFD6pEvbnj8ZMcz8sh47mt6Kle1rGvElPtTFiPGfvxVJlif ptsS69rPwyDqJ9WUFjRFNFovzQo9q2CX6ZS0fbmoWt9sOKhaFr5057hgLVkGO5ZcSEqFBzzVq0lKZH w=
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.060, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1g0pnf-0002U6-N7 e996b2821f08b5c883c71fd5a6390a9b
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAOdDvNobqcQ9VEpQ1V+AoMoT390eCc4+O2YXpHAqjwdUXO8Tag@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/35913
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>

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 2:54 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:

> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct-07: Discuss
>
> 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-expect-ct/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks for the work done on defining this mechanism! I think it's quite
> useful, and I plan to ballot "Yes" as soon as the minor but important issue
> below is fixed.
>
> §6.1:
>
> >  Status:  standard
>
> My reading of RFC 3864 does not allow Experimental RFCs to register HTTP
> header
> fields as "Status: Standard."
>
>
agree that should be experimental

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email