IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-31: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Wed, 23 October 2019 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8896B12083E; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:16:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 GKqF6fWI0mf4; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.127]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB836120823; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:16:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id x9NF8In8002404; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:15:22 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=Q+TKmD/PQopm5YR2cmrP5y9icpZJR1pHck3hiS4n3MY=; b=SzKIR2dIfAiw5ayIfXgSQJsHS1NdJQNcy4sHbuqVKtxSwOmeyZEuihBPdE0HAMoABoAN 4Tta3kH6o5Owqmx2kCRu1d8NFtudGrysaCsY55WT0DNA/pnbtVIP7geNZm3E0EyXXd8E QDWQLFLZ2MrxM0c/GDNFQbnO5NhmvXB79Ah6EjGfWm+GKTNdh3VtFT3fVNPkNsoHD9Bm qYlPwVczX2mM6wZjoukY9DFFRDspx+tlCT7pz/5c9Mpqh5Nu+JNV2ZtY/Ruz7cpYdtBl qdK65rCqiBDaTbPc03XLAjTp0vasegD8jemfM8xrZ3Qeead4ZglA6aCAguzl7puMt5Bu 6Q==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2vsrvpq2wu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:15:22 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9NF2Gah028847; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:15:21 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2vqwtwj44d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:15:21 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:15:20 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) with mapi id 15.00.1473.005; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:15:20 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Rob Stradling <rob@sectigo.com>, "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis@ietf.org>, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "trans-chairs@ietf.org" <trans-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Trans] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-31: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHVibHFktURBy7Al0KOX7a9wZdzN6doVfmA
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 15:15:19 +0000
Message-ID: <6389E75F-4354-433C-809A-858869616283@akamai.com>
References: <2B1C3261-7034-45D9-A70D-EA194C11C5E5@akamai.com> <26133e7a-b47a-ed38-29e4-68d89b9a5cbf@sectigo.com>
In-Reply-To: <26133e7a-b47a-ed38-29e4-68d89b9a5cbf@sectigo.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.1e.0.191013
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.38.39]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <70B207AFF3794C4C8F7E088FD6585685@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-10-23_03:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=995 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910230152
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,1.0.8 definitions=2019-10-23_04:2019-10-23,2019-10-23 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=978 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1908290000 definitions=main-1910230153
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/2GWvYmtYfz1AYXrclPRsKlH6Dl0>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-31: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 15:16:26 -0000

>        request without modification at a later date.  Note that as per
        [RFC7231], in the case of a 503 response the log MAY include a
        "Retry-After:" header in order to request a minimum time for the
        client to wait before retrying the request.
  
Sorry cache-miss :)
  
>    Mirja is recommending that we also specify in -bis a default (and 
    completely arbitrary) waiting time, for situations where the log server 
    does not send an explicit "Retry-After" header.  Do you have a view on that?
  
I am opposed to this change.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email