IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-nottingham-safe-hint-05.txt> (The "safe" HTTP Preference) to Proposed Standard

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 16 November 2014 21:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5706A1A1B5C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:48:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Vve0Kes9sK-w for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:48:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98A421A00FF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:48:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ex7so4006621wid.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:48:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=6PtixXL6duS3JTJfeYpwcFMQskFsTciEc4d1w/84Wd4=; b=Qh0EY8Y9vsrMYrGZwO+yqFNo3tHzkocN7aqjriKFNLvIqYmigDxEUwly3GsRuLWzfh Cn4DaEWjL11keLGwJml4UXOt+uEZbJoXRJ0wCgeY//3yldBoT6YAYC1Cmbb5tdtb3D6+ HEFpy2/9wRCz4B3iMcQO2KnwuT/QEe8W/TNKLn/zbOQgCUQFOfZEInuI/qpM4LAzsjC6 +PebWpfOw4xASclXWuSEAq171bTYrAkl5r0XEb3Tvgy/WKieAqchjWuBlDwqBw5yB1WA iNT/pgQmP685wHhMcyMOoVM2o0aVnOjmlSrHkcdYim9N52W9URMGSvKsa7rLux5FzWQn UJcg==
X-Received: by 10.180.211.108 with SMTP id nb12mr26135284wic.76.1416174518415; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:48:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.103] (IGLD-84-228-17-54.inter.net.il. [84.228.17.54]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id mu4sm12719854wib.2.2014.11.16.13.48.36 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:48:37 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.0 \(1990.1\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-nottingham-safe-hint-05.txt> (The "safe" HTTP Preference) to Proposed Standard
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20141116211016.14263.qmail@ary.lan>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 23:48:33 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8E50604A-9248-4779-A006-D7CAE8941A86@gmail.com>
References: <20141116211016.14263.qmail@ary.lan>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1990.1)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hkSdxRAs3s_716BKq5Wl8JbLXJ8
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 21:48:41 -0000

> On Nov 16, 2014, at 11:10 PM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Here's a concrete suggestion: the Bing search engine and IE browser
>>> support this safe flag right now.  Could you talk to the people
>>> responsible for them and ask whether they considered more fine grained
>>> schemes such as PICS, and why they implemented a single bit instead?
>> 
>> Or, I can go to their website and see that their “bit" implements ternary logic:
> 
> Bing implements the exact proposal in this I-D.  (The I-D says so.)
> 
> If you believe otherwise, please provide references.

Reference?  Just see the screenshot of the Bing preferences page:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/attach/ietf/pngkwLXzM.png

So a single bit value might get you to the “moderate” or “strict” settings, even if your profile says that you would like “off”, but that’s not what they want. If they wanted a strictly on/off switch, they would implement it in their profiles, just as Google did.

Yoav

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email