Re: Request for well-known URI: est

Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com> Tue, 16 April 2013 20:15 UTC

Return-Path: <turners@ieca.com>
X-Original-To: wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8766521F977C for <wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.986
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.279, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, 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 4mrBFverN8G9 for <wellknown-uri-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gateway11.websitewelcome.com (gateway11.websitewelcome.com [67.18.7.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 240F621F9783 for <wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:15:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gateway11.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id CEC58926529C0; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:15:48 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from gator1743.hostgator.com (gator1743.hostgator.com [184.173.253.227]) by gateway11.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B57F292652967 for <wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:15:48 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [108.45.16.214] (port=55351 helo=thunderfish.local) by gator1743.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <turners@ieca.com>) id 1USCI8-0001p5-Ew; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:15:48 -0500
Message-ID: <516DB173.6010102@ieca.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:15:47 -0400
From: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: Request for well-known URI: est
References: <516D6CC8.6070705@ieca.com> <516D6D25.708@ieca.com> <CALaySJLn4_ZZ0kv-2M_E0kZerj7JLJfathBwezBcZAH62ySuKg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLn4_ZZ0kv-2M_E0kZerj7JLJfathBwezBcZAH62ySuKg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator1743.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ieca.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: (thunderfish.local) [108.45.16.214]:55351
X-Source-Auth: sean.turner@ieca.com
X-Email-Count: 5
X-Source-Cap: ZG9tbWdyNDg7ZG9tbWdyNDg7Z2F0b3IxNzQzLmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20=
Cc: "app-ads@tools.ietf.org" <app-ads@tools.ietf.org>, wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pkix-est@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Well-Known URI review list <wellknown-uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wellknown-uri-review>, <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/wellknown-uri-review>
List-Post: <mailto:wellknown-uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wellknown-uri-review>, <mailto:wellknown-uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 20:15:51 -0000

On 4/16/13 12:32 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> (Correcting the CC list; please only reply to this one...)
>
>> I'd like to request a review of registration request for
>> .well-known/est, which is found in
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pkix-est/.
>>
>> Summary: EST (Enrollment over Secure Transport) is a way for clients to
>> retrieve PKI-related "stuff" from an EST server.  Think posting
>> enrollment requests (i.e., PKCS#10), getting enrollment responses (i.e.,
>> PKCS#7 certs-only), re-enrollment, CA certificates, etc.
>>
>>
>> A related question, which I'm hoping you might be able to help with:
>> when specifying the URI bit below our soon-to-be wellknown URI do we
>> need to specify whether they are case sensitive or not?  For example, we
>> have:
>>
>> /.well-known/est/CACerts
>>
>> but would that only be the same as the following if we state that it's
>> case insensitive:
>>
>> /.well-known/est/cacerts
>
> Well, RFC 5785 says this:
>
>     Registered names MUST conform to the segment-nz production in
>     [RFC3986].
>
> And RFC 3986 says this:
>
>        segment-nz    = 1*pchar
> ...
>        pchar         = unreserved / pct-encoded / sub-delims / ":" / "@"
>
> This is part of the "path" portion of the URI, which is case-sensitive.
>
> You would need to register all case combinations that you intend to
> use.  If you register "CACerts", then "cacerts" would not match.  If
> you register "CACerts" *and* "cacerts", then "CACERTS" would not
> match.
>
> You need to pick one.  It would be a bad idea to register multiple
> similar ones.  I suggest registering the all-lower-case version,
> "cacerts".
>
> Probably, 5785 should have declared well-known names to be
> case-insensitive, but it didn't.  I suspect that the designated
> experts would not accept registrations for different uses for names
> that differ only in case.

Glad I asked.  I had comment in my not-yet provided set of AD review 
comments.  I'll add it there.

spt