Re: [websec] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 01 May 2012 08:10 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853AA21F84A1 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 May 2012 01:10:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.925, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IrMgpn2gTF+l for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 May 2012 01:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1DBCD21F844D for <websec@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 May 2012 01:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 May 2012 08:10:55 -0000
Received: from p5DD973F3.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [93.217.115.243] by mail.gmx.net (mp027) with SMTP; 01 May 2012 10:10:55 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18wKG8a+nIwIMaLMduMSlWWAxyOLXmwIyaI7LLO17 2CY9KO+w3CP5Gp
Message-ID: <4F9F9A8D.8080004@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 10:10:53 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120420 Thunderbird/12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E003928106147@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <4F9EC5BD.7000404@gmx.de> <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039281075DB@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com>
In-Reply-To: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039281075DB@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: "draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec@tools.ietf.org>, "websec@ietf.org" <websec@ietf.org>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [websec] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Web Application Security Minus Authentication and Transport <websec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/websec>
List-Post: <mailto:websec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 08:11:00 -0000

On 2012-05-01 04:55, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 10:03 AM
>> To: Murray S. Kucherawy
>> Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org; websec@ietf.org; draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec@tools.ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [websec] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec
>>
>> On 2012-04-29 09:11, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>>   >  ...
>>> Section 6.1.1: I think the "delta-seconds" should be:
>>>
>>> delta-seconds = 1*DIGIT
>>>
>>> ; defined in Section 3.3.2 of [RFC2616] ...
>>
>> That would copy the rule from RFC 2616 "by value".
>
> Why not just say "delta-seconds is defined in Section 3.3.2 of [RFC2616]" and leave out the restatement of the ABNF?  Then it's truly only specified in one place.

That's *exactly* what the prose ABNF rule is doing; except that it makes 
the in-spec ABNF complete.

> ...

Best regards, Julian