IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ohttp] Discovery (no)

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Mon, 26 July 2021 17:10 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 756093A1DAC for <ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 6qOHyCNMVK1c for <ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:09:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd29.google.com (mail-io1-xd29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 682893A1DAA for <ohttp@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd29.google.com with SMTP id l126so12742894ioa.12 for <ohttp@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lYkVa0fdnNRYI6W52CmBB9lvZ07KDML2L8GNpW9W2fY=; b=iXApJ5PF0VJRSkKFRM73zmEa1Wld6g37oPp2UUed3+e8fr060XqxY4LHytV8OP8gjB 49IihHIiZOja7JX+BYgK1dUJJZEkIO4NO7lVYPRM0BvONytngLugIDnz/2naGNWRsUHu BbPB7AjP8nVEb/WGPON4j7Q9an+yQ5vJCx4CAqBGjTVsBpyHqDMU5fJFunhCNsJuwGQp O9i6ohf9yBTrS8/Ioe1/kkalxSPySZZE5FhzrNMNuseyL0YsoIYGVpB2mpNSEn4vu8Ih h8iQOeKZ/KBa6IRQ+inma+of9V4C3JMarhULP0GmLtyDbLm9AZKq5vz/XZlDdJIDASDm FJdw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lYkVa0fdnNRYI6W52CmBB9lvZ07KDML2L8GNpW9W2fY=; b=GZJXh0+0zOv9hcbyvlfaCZN1o6geXtHg9fSvLk9aMxXdLI+1KMQobfb0Q0aV3VbmYu MGt+3If5DtlDmpw876dPixEqyWcrcDZbITwMzXgGE+aRKSJD52JCbJZdVGlh1R4FoDph GqtoN6rebj9w1kjuNJfCriprOvsOcO+kQ610hnz7Qk5U7DHPCsxuClCJ/c9k1QR1MN+e 7VuJnK8bB8auglqLfS/c7CmcdZk/Pw57/4Kj1PLXjt2b3FYCWqkKd9YbBW4MYwhn2Nxl 1ZuPbksLJ6Td+fpwy3fF7E77TTjBZ6K+GbZcanuRjpWj8eRXDwMCTA7e9xr4ZbYOrYry PoPQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530sOgAWZHYYlok3rqry7bZKgevmnY9kKyINDjc9qvSM0lTBI9xd mbGV48Mj4LMmimiZHpkeEtOy+Pz5jOo/TcqQhzZHJnZtuG/eww==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxxH9WueCJSbDMnWIwKO7qeBfbNcJ3kL6ZAiT/e1IdRPTUibepBedrrprkMqSeqUzd3jRi2ADhMCUcrBEaJWaw=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:e60f:: with SMTP id g15mr15354318ioh.48.1627319392912; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEm8Q12LUx42gYODFVBpLUd0UbwfAvfScDC5Wnm+jsmaB6osQQ@mail.gmail.com> <3cb3ea05-57d8-4db2-9bdb-78cf8d8cf4c5@www.fastmail.com> <CAEm8Q12MegnasLOOEcCVLkZ_gW9E2JXx9hoWF1hFm+4dcwfXyw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEm8Q12MegnasLOOEcCVLkZ_gW9E2JXx9hoWF1hFm+4dcwfXyw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:09:16 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBMMh6rOymV9QB7sgCB33PD91im94nNR1h2gBo7fmEriRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa.net.uk>
Cc: Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>, ohttp@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000059d99505c809d2a5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ohttp/yK5jXpQZ5yjJHS9nqeT5hXU_OPU>
Subject: Re: [Ohttp] Discovery (no)
X-BeenThere: ohttp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Oblivious HTTP <ohttp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ohttp>, <mailto:ohttp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ohttp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ohttp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ohttp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ohttp>, <mailto:ohttp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 17:10:04 -0000

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 10:02 AM Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa.net.uk>
wrote:

> Good point, please excuse my bad wording, there can no be
> interoperability, as there is no way for someone to implement a working
> end-to-end connection based on the RFC and check it against another
> implementation. It is enough to implement the defined components but not a
> full solution.
>

I don't believe that this is correct.

The basic insight here is that in most of the cases of interest there is
*already* a relationship between the client and the origin server and that
relationship is already worked out of band in some way. So that piece does
not need interop.

-Ekr


> Thomas
>
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 at 16:05, Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021, at 7:21 AM, Thomas Mangin wrote:
>> > Hello, I just found this mailing list/group and I am curious.
>> >
>> > Mark makes a good point but it is possible to implement a HTTP proxy
>> > using the HTTP specification, and the specification is for a protocol
>> > which can work without proxy.
>> >
>> > I am unclear on what this group intend to standardise if part of the
>> > protocol is left undocumented: it will prevent interoperability and may
>> > lead to multiple incompatible different key discovery mechanism and
>> > therefore non-interroperable implementations.
>>
>> Can you elaborate on what OHTTP interoperability problems arise if two
>> different discovery mechanisms are used?
>>
>> Best,
>> Chris
>>
>> --
>> Ohttp mailing list
>> Ohttp@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ohttp
>>
> --
> Ohttp mailing list
> Ohttp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ohttp
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email