IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Thu, 15 November 2018 22:32 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 89688130E19 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:32:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.651
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 5y_xtJUgw6Ww for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:32:05 -0800 (PST)
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 E97E1124BAA for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:32:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1gNQ8J-0007bv-PE for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:29:07 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:29:07 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1gNQ8J-0007bv-PE@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([2603:400a:ffff:804:801e:34:0:4f]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <adam@nostrum.com>) id 1gNQ8G-0007b9-Tx for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:29:05 +0000
Received: from raven-v6.nostrum.com ([2001:470:d:1130::1] helo=nostrum.com) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <adam@nostrum.com>) id 1gNQ8F-00027O-5u for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:29:04 +0000
Received: from Svantevit.attlocal.net (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id wAFMSQ4s005902 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:28:28 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Svantevit.attlocal.net
To: Emily Stark <estark@google.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-httpbis-expect-ct@ietf.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <153682169290.9530.10396840495307914328.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <050cd76f-cd38-3495-e76b-66ab2e1201ab@gmx.de> <CAPP_2Saey9jhsi4NLe-ugXApjdvCJg=qsS=B4n0FQ9ASFiumaw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <48536670-e0b9-0236-3722-e368a0130315@nostrum.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:28:21 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPP_2Saey9jhsi4NLe-ugXApjdvCJg=qsS=B4n0FQ9ASFiumaw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------D590A94F56976CB8B22E5779"
Content-Language: en-US
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.757, BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1gNQ8F-00027O-5u 513f4b1947fa76eba666b664d3e99bad
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/48536670-e0b9-0236-3722-e368a0130315@nostrum.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/36074
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>

Thanks. This addresses my concern, and I will clear my discuss once a 
new version of the document is in the i-d repository.

/a

On 11/10/18 11:31 AM, Emily Stark wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> Thanks for the review. I've addressed your comments in 
> https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/d6e31360bdeeace4b8271162b0a8d25b836eb446. 
> (Some of them had already been fixed during other reviews.)
> Emily
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:25 AM Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de 
> <mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>     On 9/13/2018 8:54 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
>     > ...
>     > §2.1.3:
>     >
>     >>   The "max-age" directive is REQUIRED to be present within an
>     "Expect-
>     >>   CT" header field.
>     >
>     > This doesn't appear to be true as stated; or, at least, it is
>     stated in a
>     > somewhat confusing way. A casual reading of this requirement is
>     that an
>     > "Expect-CT" header field is noncompliant if it is missing this
>     directive.
>     > Based on the examples given, the actual requirement here is that
>     a response
>     > that contains an Expect-CT header field MUST contain an
>     Expect-CT header field
>     > with a max-age directive, although that directive does not
>     necessarily need to
>     > appear in each Expect-CT header field. This should probably be
>     clarified.
>     > ...
>
>     That's another case where progress on
>     <https://github.com/httpwg/http-core/issues/111> would help. This
>     plagues other WG drafts as well.
>
>     Best regards, Julian
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email