On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen < henrikn@microsoft.com> wrote: > Mike, > > I think the reason why your argument fails to convince is that it is made > at the wrong layer. I don't think it fails to convince. I'm winning this argument by a mile! I'd be happy to take a poll to find out. mike > It is essentially not an HTTP issue but a content provider issue whether > content is exposed over TLS or not. Every content provider today has the > option of using TLS or not -- some has chosen to use it and others not. It > would be much more beneficial if you could convince content providers that > is it a good idea for them to use TLS. > I think you would feel the same if I argued that TCP should be abandoned > in favor or TLS throughout the Internet. Clearly that would feel like > overreach from a policy point of view that doesn't reflect what TCP is > actually used for. > > I doubt you will find anybody who will "vote against the user" but it also > somewhat naïve to say that the user is "safe" if we use TLS. Having TLS does not make you safe. But not having it *does* make you unsafe. Mike > There are so many other aspects (privacy, tracking, etc.) that directly > involve content providers directly so rather than focusing on one > particular aspect (TLS) I would argue that the right discussion to have is > with content providers about what it means to expose data in a safe manner. > Not whether TLS should be mandatory in HTTP or not. > > Henrik > > -----Original Message----- > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de] > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:04 AM > To: Mike Belshe > Cc: Willy Tarreau; Phillip Hallam-Baker; Adrien W. de Croy; Rajeev Bector; > Martin Thomson; "Martin J. Dürst"; Doug Beaver; ietf-http-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: HTTP2 Expression of Interest > > On 2012-07-18 09:50, Mike Belshe wrote: > > ... > > It does not go without notice from me that the battle lines are drawn > > around which type of developer you are. Browser developers and social > > content providers are all in the protect-the-users camp (encrypt > > everything). Proxy vendors, which have an uncertain role in an > > encrypted future, are unilaterally against it. This is a power > > struggle of products. Are the endpoints in charge? Or is the 3rd > > party middleman in charge? > > > > Again, I vote for the user. > > ... > > The user wants security. But the user also wants speed, or the ability to > access a site from an environment that insists on opening the connection. > > Best regards, Julian > > > > > > >Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 08:48:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 18 July 2012 08:48:52 GMT