IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uta] MTA-STS-03 review

Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> Wed, 22 March 2017 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <jgh@wizmail.org>
X-Original-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4754128BB6 for <uta@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:28:40 -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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 b1E_mjeifdXC for <uta@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:28:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (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 F3A7F12894A for <uta@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [2a00:b900:109e:0:c5d6:c61b:f5e0:b51f] (helo=lap.dom.ain) by wizmail.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89_RC100) id 1cqmrz-0000j8-JX for uta@ietf.org (return-path <jgh@wizmail.org>); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:28:35 +0000
To: uta@ietf.org
References: <4C0807DA-4852-4DAC-80ED-8A25371CFFAA@dukhovni.org> <CANtKdUfOZYSr_SuGHdDHHgrF8J5VjEWwVw_7KC2xS5DrCKhu-w@mail.gmail.com> <46C421CB-1189-4493-B322-5A214D6A6EE9@dukhovni.org> <CANtKdUfwR=BM0aS07UAdoZre3gDfaSs0kwedKidwG2XVXB+XPw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org>
Message-ID: <709db615-1750-bd31-f7e8-af1372673260@wizmail.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:28:34 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANtKdUfwR=BM0aS07UAdoZre3gDfaSs0kwedKidwG2XVXB+XPw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [2a00:b900:109e:0:c5d6:c61b:f5e0:b51f] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uta/Sio0Z9dK9DyubBA-HBnvXfC7mqM>
Subject: Re: [Uta] MTA-STS-03 review
X-BeenThere: uta@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: UTA working group mailing list <uta.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/uta/>
List-Post: <mailto:uta@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:28:41 -0000

On 22/03/17 19:50, Daniel Margolis wrote:
> But I'd appreciate feedback from the wider peanut gallery here, too.
> Parsing key/value pairs isn't hard, but do people prefer that (is there a
> standard parser?) versus taking a dependency on an existing JSON lib?

>From the Exim developer's point of view, I much prefer name/value pairs
since we have existing code doing that.  We don't have any JSON and
having to add some would be one more barrier against implementing STS.
-- 
Cheers,
  Jeremy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email