Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962
Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Tue, 11 March 2014 12:40 UTC
Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F781A0716 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 R1iGYnpBaQDB for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x22b.google.com (mail-la0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E301A0715 for <trans@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e16so5581275lan.16 for <trans@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ygQg5ady6XqgwvSLe7VZDmji2Sj98kVp72mO0KODp30=; b=iTeKcRFAoObN/Zle7cjzm1cOn+mPVsWu8aiqgODII3tRwBI0vkfo9npAo6j79R2taD q4Sc2IWveH71Sn1DgruQHaZ7OkOwPHKNAbLR5LY1GPsZEoT4e4MHFiSKRPu4Ix0WW784 qXrVcf9c1TvaNOn5BWB7Bct2NDfWKKn0ehYG5xm70AqeWP6Ea/uPo6lfe798tU1LuOXo u50KpiQKwoDaSNEvxlCLmsxq5shBC74iycyYvMgtJ5FRGOvvug+sk6pRIMwr3RdBtDd+ HJYLa774j48TCtNbtGKZlAgcgq/8i2TTDh8wwh26EQnF/pvADNL1Mlw3jPurk0XSVjfY OD2Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.26.199 with SMTP id n7mr17940070lbg.27.1394541644182; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.37.168 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 05:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <531F02DB.6030701@comodo.com>
References: <CAMm+LwhpCD9gf_XJUTsKBo3739jOeiHdedqWwi3b0jkeZkSo8w@mail.gmail.com> <531F02DB.6030701@comodo.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:40:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+Lwh9HrMyN6D-HR=LrbPtVd1wwFiLyp+EtV8TeENxuOKF7w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11337302537afe04f45407d7"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/vjbBymEbas1eDQe0Qg-5dXBAXj4
Cc: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:40:53 -0000
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com>wrote: > On 10/03/14 20:58, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > >> Following on from my last one that went out early... >> > <snip> > > 3) Shouldn't it be possible for a service to manage multiple logs? I >> would think this particularly important in the case of a retrieve-only >> log which is serving multiple logs. But the same point can be made about >> the add operation. >> > > https://<log server>/ct/v1/add-chain > > Phill, are you assuming that "<log server>" can't have a "/" in it? If > so, that's an invalid assumption. > > The values of "<log server>" for the 2 CT Logs that Google are currently > operating are "ct.googleapis.com/pilot" and "ct.googleapis.com/aviator". > Problem with that approach is that it means that each log deployment requires server admin to create the distribution point and isn't compatible with the .well-known convention. -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/
- [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Rob Stradling
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Rob Stradling
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Ben Laurie
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Ben Laurie
- Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962 Eran Messeri