IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [websec] request for feedback on adoption of drafts to WG - until Dec-16

Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org> Fri, 24 December 2010 11:23 UTC

Return-Path: <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
X-Original-To: websec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7DE3A67B4 for <websec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Dec 2010 03:23:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -93.503
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-93.503 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PzhJPkbSbUUd for <websec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Dec 2010 03:23:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lvps83-169-7-107.dedicated.hosteurope.de (lvps83-169-7-107.dedicated.hosteurope.de [83.169.7.107]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D25AE3A67CF for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Dec 2010 03:23:12 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gondrom.org; b=lliZIDs7M5uMi72lthk/lWqV8LOoIqeNbOR1UgD5DiCKnKYBq/2vvTiIXdvXLIgg789iwfIGJG1sJl3dHNH31L1dEcPWV5L6wFVv2eJNJ86Ym+OIm4BQERkRJQB4HGPt; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:X-Priority:References:In-Reply-To:X-Enigmail-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
Received: (qmail 1909 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2010 12:24:58 +0100
Received: from unknown (HELO seraphim.heaven) (62.145.29.194) by lvps83-169-7-107.dedicated.hosteurope.de with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 24 Dec 2010 12:24:58 +0100
Message-ID: <4D148311.6010208@gondrom.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 11:25:05 +0000
From: Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 SUSE/3.1.6 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: websec@ietf.org
X-Priority: 4 (Low)
References: <4D01201E.8000007@gondrom.org> <71c0e78249b5.4d096c09@naist.jp>
In-Reply-To: <71c0e78249b5.4d096c09@naist.jp>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [websec] request for feedback on adoption of drafts to WG - until Dec-16
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Web Application Security Minus Authentication and Transport <websec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 11:23:14 -0000

Hello Greg,
thank you for your comment.
Btw. actually hodges-strict-transport-sec is about the _policy_ to
enforce secure HTTP transport, which is in scope, as also outlined in
the charter.

So there will be no problem with that.

Kind regards, Tobias



On 12/15/2010 04:31 PM, Blanc Gregory wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would say yes though hodges-strict-transport-sec is about enforcing
> secure HTTP transport which I though was out of the scope. Am I mistaken?
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
> 12/10/10 に、Tobias Gondrom  <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org> さんは書きました:
>
>> Hello dear fellow websec members, 
>>
>>     
>>
>>     during the hasmat BOF in July and the websec charter consensus three
>>     individual drafts were listed as to be worked on as first items in
>>     our working group. I did so far not formally ask for WG consensus on
>>     adopting these three documents until now; our area director
>>     suggested that it would be appropriate to do so before they are
>>     re-submitted as working group drafts. 
>>
>>     
>>
>>     So I would like to ask for your feedback on adopting the following
>>     three individual drafts as WG documents (as outlined in the
>>     charter): 
>>
>>     
>>
>>     - draft-abarth-origin: 
>>
>>     http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/rfcmarkup.cgi?draft=draft-abarth-origin
>>
>>         
>>
>>     - hodges-strict-transport-sec: 
>>
>>       http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/rfcmarkup.cgi?draft=draft-hodges-strict-transport-sec
>>
>>     
>>
>>     - draft-abarth-mime-sniff: 
>>
>>     http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/rfcmarkup.cgi?draft=draft-abarth-mime-sniff
>>
>>     
>>
>>     Please reply ("yes" (for adoption) or "no" (against adoption), both
>>     are important) - either for each draft individually or for all three
>>     drafts as a bundle - to the list by Thurs 16th December 2010
>>     (24:00GMT). 
>>
>>     
>>
>>     Kind regards and thanks a lot, 
>>
>>     
>>
>>     Tobias
>>
>>     chair of websec
>>
>>     
>>
>>     
>>
>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> websec mailing list
>> websec@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec
> _______________________________________________
> websec mailing list
> websec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email