Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-02, "2.2.1 Advertising Support for Client Hints"

Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@gmail.com> Fri, 07 October 2016 18:47 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 1AFFD1295DC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.516
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 OP0T0b9ASHtb for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:47:44 -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 D83D11293E1 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:47:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1bsa85-0005Zx-U1 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 18:44:21 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 18:44:21 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1bsa85-0005Zx-U1@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 <igrigorik@gmail.com>) id 1bsa82-0005Z6-31 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 18:44:18 +0000
Received: from mail-lf0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <igrigorik@gmail.com>) id 1bsa7z-0001qf-F7 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 18:44:17 +0000
Received: by mail-lf0-f51.google.com with SMTP id b81so47722953lfe.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:43:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oTqexXJxrq0yfayrODjWjD4s0NtaeJKjC2FMyXWqfeE=; b=BRBcVWaZd5ru/B+cn9SI7Lk567UMnh8wGhX+iyPsFBJHuz2HYGvHhv+a+PkCWNahGk WuPayQ0pbNdOxlU/UVQBXWJzVUJORE2DS9p0gadaoRo1LraN+Q3vrijB+PfRFH5NkgKc ErzohOmqdKQIbnKJNrHpO2tZIUs/4eb+yyLE8QmqFZ8/ALTKfgXOptGOXImbMvZz50ZD Ss0W+DuV10FEl5K7wjcOsClD7EwxPvLFznauuvFTibqPOi8vpjM9VB70xz8tOWCmpUB4 A4GaBfAyUII9sIvlpAfqktSFIR3Y6rxA7KxZKu1rxdFHqG1vvXscZ9hFCMDUAGQrTsJF R0iQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oTqexXJxrq0yfayrODjWjD4s0NtaeJKjC2FMyXWqfeE=; b=L/YQGs7wi0lRkLO/TRi6lQ9kAQuMhn3acD+hccxve3+YtA4BNjvk4u1+79zczBevF0 TFEuO30Id5pi+SQhEE/4Z8Y9c+M+mIdUYfFTQY4FEjVMBMtLio763lUacZyb4RA+qWbe WmRqgroKnkUROJ/cPia05nyLuuW/UxZ+2bw70JG7SCmr31k2hhJZda+ljLWDUpIigfZr TxJE2FsAyk8BXKV9QbiLzRFzpd+OcdDCrEdXdanyZeqO0RYfodB6DFId40DWZHjeGOPK pusCe8MQt5uo85CnEMpAsIS5hcbRuKE5hoEDCVdidZ4t/5vF4NxBzrrLr0UGMlpLkzZd +sXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RlWnvQsqBL30Bb0Wjk4cLNA9Dc9YI9dA3GYqajHGEHXIN2ZDCqsc46TYmUQ2PTIIV7FDQ1t5EIdRodAWQ==
X-Received: by 10.46.9.75 with SMTP id 72mr8492091ljj.48.1475865828108; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.114.96.201 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:43:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <305711ec-3ef5-a2c3-7be4-aef2ded0d195@gmx.de>
References: <305711ec-3ef5-a2c3-7be4-aef2ded0d195@gmx.de>
From: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:43:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKRe7JH7mpx4LHuwgTZDRm-gprkHd+t1rZ7TWxEHKfLowPi6PQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114b10366bb0b0053e4aca28
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.215.51; envelope-from=igrigorik@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf0-f51.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.893, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1bsa7z-0001qf-F7 16882ec536d6a13f8736c1168cf77aad
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-02, "2.2.1 Advertising Support for Client Hints"
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAKRe7JH7mpx4LHuwgTZDRm-gprkHd+t1rZ7TWxEHKfLowPi6PQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32524
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 Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:47 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
wrote:

> "When a client receives Accept-CH, or if it is capable of processing the
> HTML response and finds an equivalent HTML meta element, it SHOULD append
> the Client-Hint header fields that match the advertised field-values to the
> header list of all subsequent requests. For example, based on Accept-CH
> example above, a user agent could append DPR, Width, Viewport-Width, and
> Downlink header fields to all subresource requests initiated by the page
> constructed from the response. Alternatively, a client can treat advertised
> support as a persistent origin preference and append same header fields on
> all future requests initiated to and by the resources associated with that
> origin."
>
> The "SHOULD" IMHO is problematic, as it isn't clear from the following
> text to what URIs it applies? All of the same origin? Only the same
> resource? Subresources?
>

It was left intentionally vague to allow for flexibility as different
UAs/clients experiment with how and when to send these hints. Some
additional context here:
https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-client-hints-02.html#security-considerations

Open to suggestions for how to word it better though :-)