Re: [websec] #16: lack of explanatory text and no justifications for the normative language
"websec issue tracker" <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org> Tue, 15 November 2011 02:50 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org>
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 698D31F0D58 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:50:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 joDfSxqY7sAN for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:50:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gamay.tools.ietf.org (gamay.tools.ietf.org [208.66.40.242]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516611F0D47 for <websec@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:50:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=gamay.tools.ietf.org) by gamay.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1RQ96j-0002pv-Fz; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 21:50:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: websec issue tracker <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.2
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.2, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff@tools.ietf.org, ietf@adambarth.com, masinter@adobe.com
X-Trac-Project: websec
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 02:50:45 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/websec/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/websec/trac/ticket/16#comment:2
Message-ID: <082.21e40fb992c0be70c1b854e9ab4f5b31@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <067.0c626f20ba70069d5bffe870f0af308a@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 16
In-Reply-To: <067.0c626f20ba70069d5bffe870f0af308a@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff@tools.ietf.org, ietf@adambarth.com, masinter@adobe.com, websec@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on gamay.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To:
Resent-Message-Id: <20111115025053.516611F0D47@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:50:52 -0800
Resent-From: trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: websec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [websec] #16: lack of explanatory text and no justifications for the normative language
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 15 Nov 2011 02:50:54 -0000
#16: lack of explanatory text and no justifications for the normative language
Comment (by masinter@…):
I think a test suite (with links to, copy of, or at least documentation
of) real, deployed, useful sites which need each sniffing configuration
will go a long way toward justifying what we have.
Frankly, I suspect that some cases of sniffing which were valid in 2009
may no longer be valid in 2011.
--
-----------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff@…
tobias.gondrom@… | Status: new
Type: defect | Milestone:
Priority: major | Version:
Component: mime-sniff | Resolution:
Severity: Active WG |
Document |
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/websec/trac/ticket/16#comment:2>
websec <http://tools.ietf.org/websec/>
- [websec] #16: lack of explanatory text and no jus… websec issue tracker
- Re: [websec] #16: lack of explanatory text and no… websec issue tracker
- Re: [websec] #16: lack of explanatory text and no… Tobias Gondrom
- Re: [websec] #16: lack of explanatory text and no… websec issue tracker