IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade

SM <sm@resistor.net> Thu, 09 December 2010 09:54 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DE2228C0E8 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Dec 2010 01:54:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.457
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.457 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.142, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tirk1Z9kH+Od for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Dec 2010 01:54:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ns1.qubic.net (ns1.qubic.net [208.69.177.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2467428C0CF for <hybi@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Dec 2010 01:54:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net ([10.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns1.qubic.net (8.14.5.Alpha0/8.14.5.Alpha0) with ESMTP id oB99tHI1010209 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Dec 2010 01:55:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1291888546; x=1291974946; bh=i6nOwmPSWh+TkMIncWeY7kOArsuxfsffFeqiEvHK6T8=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=igJqP/qGen91ZO7uVbqwskqO9dmWj9DnKVENqBKaPU3i58gWgmPVNkp1d2hWPNw1y AsAmj0XTj8baU6nvThkLk4alw090hB++jTJt83ZcVblkj0uPcCTej8zplLbQMB9ekF 0aNXyavLpanc50h7whKoJfEabgOyrqjhv+sGpj0U=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1291888546; x=1291974946; bh=i6nOwmPSWh+TkMIncWeY7kOArsuxfsffFeqiEvHK6T8=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=FEpcx8kHd6MRpC1U12nC5Uod3q6hT/wPBbEONJ7XeziHEs5JgPudtk/YctPZqaMwM e28zK9rUoxhVQVWutxiZ7LmHZravE3PNoYZstsvnRmdXraCEWlngnTg0+z/1Jg3DCm 6h94mDgwnsbITISsCo59WCibRsCRYqpy2go5QND4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=mail; d=resistor.net; c=simple; q=dns; b=eoMqSiLLsQpgK0HrXeFfdTjv48/Vv89uGLaUtnsS3p4ab1QsZKaYBamaKLUSm5/WT u7os8oYO5FEAHjgvqBrvPdqt5i0qPin3AVCmMSO6v3emoIvQMoQKwugeWEgXyf9icMk mlUm8bhWPgT802kIqgboWJfsR3SvV4Dpjgd+iQo=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20101209014340.07e69af0@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 01:51:43 -0800
To: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik=aKo1+_-SGga=U8-jsTGAjy9exhNxH4beG2Ah@mail.gmail.c om>
References: <F4D1B715-3606-4E9A-BFB2-8B7BC11BE331@mnot.net> <57D4B885-B1D8-482F-8747-6460C0FFF166@apple.com> <37A00E8D-B55C-49AD-A85C-A299C80FFF17@mnot.net> <4F2580A7-79C2-4B0A-BCE5-7FB6D9AA0ED7@apple.com> <BB31C4AB95A70042A256109D461991260583956C@XCH117CNC.rim.net> <EA41A6C7-971C-4EC8-AA6F-96363B7FDC4C@gmail.com> <73E53F19-E0E7-4ADB-B765-ABAF0B4A6736@mnot.net> <r2f0g6d7bj770kg0db5ptr027ninmckns8@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <20C2FBB9-901F-4235-AF23-EC8262585905@mnot.net> <mgj0g6hseqb6j92au80f8d1ook058nb33m@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <25E88686-BE24-4EFD-8330-25916C891664@mnot.net> <AANLkTi=k0Czvm_pW=N3zPAGZdKyqZGduGJUp8dk3PByX@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik=aKo1+_-SGga=U8-jsTGAjy9exhNxH4beG2Ah@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: hybi HTTP <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] workability (or otherwise) of HTTP upgrade
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 09:54:22 -0000

Hi Zhong Yu,
At 22:54 08-12-10, Zhong Yu wrote:
>WS clients should relax the rules of certificate validation. Don't
>panic on self-signed certificates like current browsers do which
>doesn't make any sense. If WSS with self-signed certificates are not
>treated more badly than plain WS,  frugal application developers don't
>need to spend any money to use WSS for the purpose of improving
>success rate. WS server can even automate self-signed certificate so
>that developers don't need to spend much time either.

See 
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-tls-server-id-check-11  I 
suggest using the certid mailing list ( 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/certid ) for any follow up.

Regards,
-sm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email