[Unbearable] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-tokbind-https-17: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 26 June 2018 18:42 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: unbearable@ietf.org
Delivered-To: unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32ACE13110D; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 11:42:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-tokbind-https@ietf.org, John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>, tokbind-chairs@ietf.org, ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com, unbearable@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153003857719.18839.13626712531775084980.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 11:42:57 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/unbearable/thiZTR6vtCsr48neB8fHMzivhOg>
Subject: [Unbearable] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-tokbind-https-17: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: unbearable@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
List-Id: "\"This list is for discussion of proposals for doing better than bearer tokens \(e.g. HTTP cookies, OAuth tokens etc.\) for web applications. The specific goal is chartering a WG focused on preventing security token export and replay attacks.\"" <unbearable.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/unbearable>, <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/unbearable/>
List-Post: <mailto:unbearable@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable>, <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 18:43:04 -0000

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tokbind-https-17: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS and substantive comments in pre-submission
text. I did not check editorial comments.

I have one remaining (non-blocking) question on section 6: Are the
“applications” from paragraph 3 the same as those from paragraph 2? It seems
like paragraph 2 is talking more about local APIs (at least, I see that was
mentioned in the text in version 17 but not in 18), but paragraph 3 uses an
example of a signal from a server. (I can accept that the difference in control
may be weak enough for web applications that the distinction does not matter.)