W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: HTTP 2.0 mandatory security vs. Amateur Radio

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:33:43 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNdCHyLxDchDkc1T_yOZtBfKZ_xut4xQZXieo12RG5JuCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com>
Cc: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>, Ryan Hamilton <rch@google.com>, David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>, James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Ah, that is unfortunate. I wish that the community had done something then,
if it had been foreseen.
-=R


On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> wrote:

>  On 11/15/2013 08:02 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
>
> I'm saying that your whole problem with intermediaries in clear stems
> directly from your attempts to push a new different protocol on a port
> already used for something else (ie trying to enter through the back-door
> like a juvenile delinquent because the guard on the main entry may object,
> ensuring that he will consider you a suspicious character)
>
>
>  Agreed.
>
> Paul Vixie sent me this:
>
> default=closed firewalls were known about fairly early on. this
> consequence was foreseeable.
>
> "I don't know what apps and protocols humanity will speak 50 years from
> now, but we will call it the Internet, and it will run over TCP port 80."
>
>
Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 17:34:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:19 UTC