W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: [foaf-protocols] HTTP request header field for acceptable authentication methods

From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 18:45:49 -0700
Message-ID: <snt0-eas146259E0C7F849FF678DDBB92DB0@phx.gbl>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: bergi <bergi@axolotlfarm.org>, "julian.reschke@greenbytes.de" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, "http-auth@ietf.org" <http-auth@ietf.org>, "fielding@gbiv.com" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org" <foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org>, "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "public-rww@w3.org" <public-rww@w3.org>
So what is webid vs webid-tls?

Does webid tls exclude ssl v3?

I ask as only very specific agendas call for the elimination of ssl v3. Only .001%  of the users know the difference, and less than half of those can accurately state it.

On Nov 4, 2011, at 2:28 AM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> On 04/11/2011, at 9:34 AM, bergi wrote:
>> Authentication Scheme
>> I was thinking about this a little bit more and now I'm not sure if we
>> should use WebID or WebID-TLS or even something else. From the
>> terminology point of view WebID-TLS would fit better.
>> HTTPBis, part 7, section 2.3 [1] points to a link on the IANA web site
>> which is dead [2]. I haven't found a new URL. Somebody knows if this
>> page has moved somewhere else?
> That link is dead because HTTPbis hasn't been through the entire process yet; the IANA registries will be established later on.
> Cheers,
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
> _______________________________________________
> foaf-protocols mailing list
> foaf-protocols@lists.foaf-project.org
> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols
Received on Saturday, 5 November 2011 01:48:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:50 GMT