Re: https at ietf.org

Sean Turner <TurnerS@ieca.com> Sat, 30 November 2013 05:17 UTC

Return-Path: <TurnerS@ieca.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 D9A601AE17B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 21:17:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.433
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.433 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_61=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 UFjW47bmEwlO for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 21:17:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gateway01.websitewelcome.com (gateway01.websitewelcome.com [69.93.106.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974B41AE0AD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 21:17:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gateway01.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id EB880ABDC2087; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 23:17:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: from gator3286.hostgator.com (gator3286.hostgator.com [198.57.247.250]) by gateway01.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D71DEABDC2067 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 23:17:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: from [173.73.126.4] (port=53924 helo=[192.168.1.100]) by gator3286.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <TurnerS@ieca.com>) id 1VmcwF-0000lL-9o; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 23:17:55 -0600
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DF45B8C5-743F-4250-B6B4-0C7F97A68EFD"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Subject: Re: https at ietf.org
From: Sean Turner <TurnerS@ieca.com>
In-Reply-To: <B3AE10BB-3A50-42A6-A7A1-E76257D9A39A@standardstrack.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 00:17:53 -0500
Message-Id: <B19E6E18-68E9-4B0D-9F99-8F7881832091@ieca.com>
References: <CAHBU6ivbrk=NXgd4_5Upik+8H0AbHRy3kJnN=8fcK+Bz3pOV9Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.01.1311051733570.4200@egate.xpasc.com> <B3AE10BB-3A50-42A6-A7A1-E76257D9A39A@standardstrack.com>
To: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator3286.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ieca.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 173.73.126.4
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ([192.168.1.100]) [173.73.126.4]:53924
X-Source-Auth: sean.turner@ieca.com
X-Email-Count: 6
X-Source-Cap: ZG9tbWdyNDg7ZG9tbWdyNDg7Z2F0b3IzMjg2Lmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20=
Cc: IETF-Discussion Discussion <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: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 05:18:00 -0000

On Nov 05, 2013, at 20:45, Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> wrote:

> Because would not someone retrieving an RFC want to know it really came from the IETF, especially when it says
>   The protocol MUST provide provisions for lawful intercept and
>   MUST post a notification when traitorous speech is detected.
> 
> ;-)
> 
> And, don’t we need to eat our own dog food?

I went for the eat our own dog food a while ago.   You might have noticed the new IETF servers support TLS 1.2 ;)

spt 

> On Nov 5, 2013, at 8:35 PM, David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I don't see reason to use https for delivery of public documents such
>> as RFCs and Internet Drafts. All that would really accomplish is
>> reduce caching opportunities.
>> 
>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Tim Bray wrote:
>> 
>>> Wouldn?t it be a good idea for everything at *.ietf.org to be served by
>>> HTTPS, and only by HTTPS?
>>> 
>