Re: [http-auth] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-httpauth-hoba-08

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Sat, 27 December 2014 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 0273D1AD4BC; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:11:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 nvpbTfvfy_QS; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:11:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59ABD1AD4BF; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:11:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.160] ([84.187.59.9]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M55BC-1XeutX3Wxi-00zCqf; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 11:11:42 +0100
Message-ID: <549E85D7.8000603@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 11:11:35 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>, "stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "paul.hoffman@vpnc.org" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, "mike@phresheez.com" <mike@phresheez.com>, "General Area Review Team (gen-art@ietf.org)" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "ops-dir@ietf.org" <ops-dir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [http-auth] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-httpauth-hoba-08
References: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362CDC75@MX104CL02.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362CDC75@MX104CL02.corp.emc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:wekNU87e4VEp7no5VvhRUj1S4UlHraiLSnxjTNF/DD7uLN+3kOX 47UHqoPGp/y8yj1J5hWz/iDf4JPOUil8lfGhu13fHVNb1J815qkAznwHqJ9XYNij5/8AsB5 Dby98X4dN4wgl27q5ZNU6DD1GLWLUrcwc2PTa09DyvOhWgTeHJvszUewCKzTJe3W7qRoEkP whpkHD7/BmWBpQ5gVon+w==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/k9njCChPzglF4Gxy7VKIotPeskA
Cc: "http-auth@ietf.org" <http-auth@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <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, 27 Dec 2014 10:11:53 -0000

On 2014-12-27 04:15, Black, David wrote:
> The -08 draft addresses all of the important issues in the combined Gen-ART
> and OPS-Dir review of the -07 version, and is a definite improvement over
> its -07 version.
>
> Based on discussion of item [5], there are a couple of remaining editorial
> nits in Section 5.3:
>
>     During the authentication phase, if the server cannot determine the
>     correct CPK, it could use HTML and JavaScript to ask the user if they
>     are really a new user or want to associate this new CPK with another
>     CPK.  The server can then use some out-of-band method (such as a
>
> "can" -> "should"
>
>     confirmation email round trip, SMS, or an UA that is already
>     enrolled) to verify that the "new" user is the same as the already-
>     enrolled one.  Thus, logging in on a new user agent is identical to
>     logging in with an existing account.
>
>     If the server does not recognize the CPK the server might send the
>     client through a either a join or login-new-UA (see below) process.
>
> "might" -> "should"
>
> I agree w/the draft editor that these are matters of editorial taste.
>
> Thanks,
> --David

For the record: I strongly disagree with the proposal to insert 
lower-cased BCP 14 keywords.


Best regards, Julian