IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WGLC comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-encryption-encoding-03, was: Encryption content coding simplification

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Fri, 14 October 2016 05:28 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 9A9CC12962B for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 22:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 cDD1TPmQe-Bh for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 22:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
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 31A601294D1 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 22:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1buuyW-0002X7-Re for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 05:24:08 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 05:24:08 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1buuyW-0002X7-Re@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1buuyR-0002WQ-Bx for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 05:24:03 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1buuyF-0003tT-GV for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 05:24:02 +0000
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([93.217.127.78]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MGSgq-1c86Fy1YJM-00DHCd; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 07:23:18 +0200
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnXCMFRthQRCgvSXVjaMwE8BPTdfUYZHCa2tEwhDQ3RUpA@mail.gmail.com> <66482.1470305393@critter.freebsd.dk> <CABkgnnVYh3=pNp4aTVf5OfvskJ8yZvA4j_MDVyQ7GoZgdZO2Kg@mail.gmail.com> <49a8c514-5a39-d4f6-7012-01977cbefb9c@gmx.de> <28071.1476344375@critter.freebsd.dk> <BN6PR03MB27081537BD49FBF383CE66E987DC0@BN6PR03MB2708.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <bc9e0fcb-03d8-5592-4388-4641d308dba3@gmx.de> <CABkgnnUYfvJWqcyT5VAVnsZr-aB9R+vR=HRT7cvjmtLFNWnz-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <9b46d708-39d6-e905-6fec-1ee6370fb3a8@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 07:23:17 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUYfvJWqcyT5VAVnsZr-aB9R+vR=HRT7cvjmtLFNWnz-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:Cx5E6KEL6F4UfUrjT7sqI2fewix8ywOtxNP9GGQNqM36nuLmIGn tKKTeVFToAIcEP0hw1OPMz/WYQ8zbfwvk4GU8j5CPd2e9Qtpf5Xk0EHvwf+pqzjRt93BUCp 471FpMiIP9cA7iIWqzj36DJG+vOOEGpKWjyapYUVdgtAaGX+swqA3JwJ9Awknzl5N/7SiWs XWu12PY5lhyEU++UIawlg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:vvxVVnjbOHg=:65eA2EQZYOuj61xLX0+dBe XGRioSsos64vUVcl+tU//EAbf6Kxn7pEetrGOxFdzw19mLy6rVG00mUE/XiC7HAqbTqGwDuVb dMooSiAh3UWW/Ehftc6Gi7OaTKnDNFdFcQpjq4G/XGxhQP5Sh99aWLOvV1EUUeaoIeMh5Q3O6 N+LdHrRoxk9ipGOJ1nvNJCXtfoKO3E3BhEJU/ctWFnBSyUwvgc0FcCrS7qVk5+6TYlykY4bqH WOypM9JGQj8sRrkwRmXPkiCUlRi+6HCYN6wogQtIooaE4n7Ejaj0hyet3d/F62dGFDdourRTd /PIKUONS9bVzfleZtuaL8SyP/XB7ojX4tAEqR/ixSkLOEzwggvk3iMDMxMi+viVgkCmrHEiSM P2GZvxQklzf5luGqPuQJzp5q9b4hJyltPJpOI33kqdanRK3Bv/+fIK1fhdd3F0yV5GZjtkLJ2 u8/JbF7ohS7wTAEPbUxLS3RUUoU0JFTR2fDZzRFiNanpLFyGkwVn73pcZ73LwtJs8efomwJ5H Sx3TlZhj/vt3l/YlKNxQYlr++OErJ1smzKlVGVEt0aHADyLyqkr3DSWagOCUlaqZQfxhzGbA1 3/trkXLwZ00COub6lMtUdqK30Gmc6aeCy/F3OE3h9zJvgEIz4jQ9M+F14yxj24Bld/rQktKMC D0BTKLKV09fl2HmG+BwHLmlFqyjG9hr7DagQS+mJlYOA0TAU2VlRbD8W0zxEdkvr5w3+9KoA/ K35iQlUH1btruWWLV8+e3/ge5W9EXHhEr1iHorKV6tw3VeJ3Q52oJBcCEDPqepQAU4o8dmTQa nPlqaYe
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.19; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.418, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1buuyF-0003tT-GV 3b3c16e976cec15348af24f54e5875aa
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: WGLC comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-encryption-encoding-03, was: Encryption content coding simplification
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/9b46d708-39d6-e905-6fec-1ee6370fb3a8@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32586
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 2016-10-14 02:01, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 14 October 2016 at 05:09, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> ...and SDCH will also need a way to send compression related parameters,
>> right?
>
> ...unless they are carried in the body.  Encryption is kinda weird in
> the sense that the content is intentionally not able to be decoded by
> every receiver.  Whereas most other content-encodings don't have that
> constraint.  As a general notion, they benefit from being decoded
> standalone.  (Yes, I believe that SDCH has header fields, but my
> conjecture is that it shouldn't.)

Good point.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email