IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Directory instead of .well-known for URL structure

Rob Stradling <rob@sectigo.com> Fri, 05 July 2019 11:44 UTC

Return-Path: <rob@sectigo.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 DB5D312004D for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 04:44:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=comodoca.onmicrosoft.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 E6MEjqlODkRQ for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 04:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr820070.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.82.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAE75120018 for <trans@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 04:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comodoca.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-comodoca-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=gCmXfi7JQNWrussz8D8Wq1PlaHE0IQ/YDarsNotCXSk=; b=ZfY0NNPShg0gTzg4REsUp+gLKdeIxwDpIcFQdbCpyyqBG22PxXhudAZjntHUtxoCYOXBIdBWE3sAWhy6EmO9qvxhcdYICV7IqnUXfExnIJQHLc9nCDEZ7ehVDmWnPd76+lQkdaNsmK2JjT6IREFR+sZV38AJX4OzmaFHXgcz9fo=
Received: from DM5PR17MB1211.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (10.173.132.148) by DM5PR17MB1338.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (10.173.134.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2052.19; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 11:44:38 +0000
Received: from DM5PR17MB1211.namprd17.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b556:345c:94cf:7258]) by DM5PR17MB1211.namprd17.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b556:345c:94cf:7258%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2052.010; Fri, 5 Jul 2019 11:44:38 +0000
From: Rob Stradling <rob@sectigo.com>
To: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
CC: Eran Messeri <eranm@google.com>, Andrew Ayer <agwa@andrewayer.name>
Thread-Topic: [Trans] Directory instead of .well-known for URL structure
Thread-Index: AQHVJ7g3xV77fgqjj0ive+Voenofmqa2OUSAgAFHIICAAC3VgIABT0mAgAAk7ACAAAclAIABd3eAgAABhgCAAVwGgA==
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 11:44:38 +0000
Message-ID: <8eb2939b-c6b1-a80b-787f-4d3c02b73f8b@sectigo.com>
References: <0d5e05fc-8f1e-54b5-536d-231153e7baf7@eff.org> <20190701123701.b3ba6b44ef85a74da6209e64@andrewayer.name> <2cbff182-7c7a-4c55-b2d2-a67f41dd7436@sectigo.com> <CAPbZxJTvk805WtR6FF8xUR0GS=E9gcEMphJR658GuTN8V0h_qg@mail.gmail.com> <047d5a04-4176-6651-b200-6ce7ce8a8266@sectigo.com> <CALzYgEc_aE+pcB-Y59VsG-s9PHyEW=94vUQdWZ7o-PvOra9PmQ@mail.gmail.com> <20190703092938.a19bf6ad88155f0b82c9fca5@andrewayer.name> <83f686e3-4e15-32a1-5a5f-ffb90822ae89@sectigo.com> <CALzYgEdQg1scqdMkeD3MCXkn_tGWG65U3Kq2ci5J-tfUXp0zSQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALzYgEdQg1scqdMkeD3MCXkn_tGWG65U3Kq2ci5J-tfUXp0zSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-clientproxiedby: LO2P265CA0388.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:f::16) To DM5PR17MB1211.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:8b::20)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rob@sectigo.com;
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [2a0e:ac00:25d:300:f68e:38ff:fe7a:a226]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1ee5e77d-184d-40fc-f1b5-08d7013e28fa
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR17MB1338;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR17MB1338:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR17MB13389C626B3B05F90D26AB8FAAF50@DM5PR17MB1338.namprd17.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 008960E8EC
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39850400004)(396003)(366004)(376002)(346002)(136003)(189003)(199004)(5660300002)(71190400001)(71200400001)(7736002)(2906002)(54906003)(102836004)(4326008)(46003)(2351001)(186003)(316002)(8936002)(31696002)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(6916009)(81166006)(66946007)(73956011)(486006)(14454004)(81156014)(1730700003)(256004)(8676002)(86362001)(305945005)(2616005)(11346002)(446003)(476003)(2501003)(6116002)(478600001)(76176011)(31686004)(99286004)(68736007)(5640700003)(6306002)(53936002)(52116002)(6436002)(6512007)(6486002)(386003)(966005)(229853002)(53546011)(25786009)(6506007)(6246003)(36756003)(142923001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR17MB1338; H:DM5PR17MB1211.namprd17.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: sectigo.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 87XeHXEa7rMOZn61XPI7ZqQIq/dKFZDUXo+Ecfic5eCCxkg2kEFcKq0A4voTtvj/+OcI446mF3iyh1qVTNP0fX+LFU25F79Pqop5iER881Q8SkUqyhq5j4kGMlIqBCOrIEsSxjsag/DsM8E8k4l0frJszd/BaF4Fo+FK1h95AmZj87PRxJNyyEv0m0Su97zjH1uENFXruBuu+Gn2qBBIGyxIPnnduuDOsiIOYIUgXpjqmDwp0jQ/RRPjMx4P4g6HlqRVtuy5RveVkCf5maCUKPV0d5y39sq02gxx5XIPaLZUzWJLYUq2wFSj6sNQFe/w2JOTCWXsPfxwDdg3rdz0gtxXxXDGVSDvquNr6PbjGOZN4ZgRZbfUBKreCDsz3zwLmBegzjJsnUVfsQdE7GtsAowIiwF2Nc3wWXHOh6cncZw=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <D1AA705BF45F0846808A304F8F2A7FE5@namprd17.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: sectigo.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1ee5e77d-184d-40fc-f1b5-08d7013e28fa
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Jul 2019 11:44:38.6251 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 0e9c4894-6caa-465d-9660-4b6968b49fb7
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: robs@comodoca.net
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR17MB1338
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/HPQmLXQMxp1IZ-kVyaerq906YTc>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Directory instead of .well-known for URL structure
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: Fri, 05 Jul 2019 11:44:46 -0000

James Manager commented on this PR [1]:

"The log parameters are not URLs, but URL templates.
The variables that can appear in the templates need to be defined as 
well. That is, 'first', 'second', 'hash', 'start, and 'end' for various 
templates.
Otherwise the spec is still forcing URL structure on servers (ie 
variables MUST be querystring fields with these given names)."

How do folks feel about this?


[1] 
https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/311#pullrequestreview-258184865

On 04/07/2019 15:58, Eran Messeri wrote:
> Looks good to me.
> 
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 3:53 PM Rob Stradling <rob@sectigo.com 
> <mailto:rob@sectigo.com>> wrote:
> 
>     SGTM.  How does this look?
> 
>     https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/311
> 
>     On 03/07/2019 17:29, Andrew Ayer wrote:
>      > On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 17:04:04 +0100
>      > Eran Messeri <eranm=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org
>     <mailto:40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
>      >
>      >> I think under-specifying it right now is the only option as we
>     have no
>      >> specification of the log metadata. I don't think it's too big of a
>      >> deal as when people start implementing 6962-bis I expect the log
>      >> metadata format will evolve based on the existing schemas and, if
>      >> necessary, could be standardized.
>      >
>      > Agreed.
>      >
>      > Regards,
>      > Andrew

-- 
Rob Stradling
Senior Research & Development Scientist
Sectigo Limited

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email