Re: [IPsec] #117: Hash and URL interop

[Tero Kivinen <[e-mail]>]

Yoav Nir writes:
> Even things that seem obvious like https and ftp require a lot of
> considerations, like how to verify the certificate in https, or what
> identity to present in ftp. 
> 
> If someone wants to specify additional URL methods, they can specify
> then in an I-D.

Yes, and but if the current documents says MUST NOT for them, then
they can have problems talking to the current implementations.

On the other hand nobody has yet answered to my earlier question what
they plan to say in the draft. Original text said "allow only http
URL", and I said MUST NOT would not be ok for me.

Paul said:

> > I agree with only listing HTTP.

which does not tell what he means with that. Do he mean that we only
list http (currently we do that, we say MUST for http urls and do not
list any other url methods). 

So I would really like to see the exact wording before I can say
anything else. Or at least better explination what is meant. 
-- 
[e-mail]