Re: HTTPS, proxying, and all that...

Ok I think this has wandered far enough for me. Send me a link to your draft when it's ready.
S

On 11 Jan 2013, at 20:44, "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:

> --------
> In message <50F0774A.6010706@cs.tcd.ie>, Stephen Farrell writes:
> 
>>> There is nothing "state of the art" about mixing p2p and e2e
>>> trust and security, PTT's and banks have been doing it for
>>> centuries.
>> 
>> Feel free to post details. I at least don't know what
>> you mean.
> 
> I'm sure you do, you just don't know that you know it.
> 
> If you are working in a big organization, I'm sure you don't
> go to the post-office yourself, you have an intern mail-service
> that will do so for you, and thanks to the separation of
> envelope from message, they can do so, without opening your
> letter.
> 
>> (I'm also not aware of how 16th century PTT's operated
>> to be honest. RFC 1149 perhaps?:-)
> 
> Amongst other technologies.
> 
> I'm sure the chinese and the romans would beg to differ, but
> read for instance:
> 
> http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/heritage/the-oldest-post-office-in-the-world-1-465812
> 
>>> The problem the HTTPbis effort has, is that it's trying to
>>> improve on one of the worlds most popular and used protocols[1].
>>> 
>>> Addressing some of its actual user-perceived shortcomings would
>>> be a very smart move from a marketing point of view.
>> 
>> Yes, but this isn't a marketing exercise.
> 
> Ask the IPv6 people if they still think that was a smart
> position to take.
> 
> Catering to your users needs is a good way to win adoption.
> 
> -- 
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>

Received on Friday, 11 January 2013 21:46:43 UTC