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

Re: something I don't get about the current plan...

From: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 14:31:41 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP+FsNc+H+x5vNYxa3SQLgQQoz6M+VaQOwDbM1uxCdviDMuf3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
The sites have control over their certs, and have complete authority and
ability to change things.
The users have little to no control over middleboxes and have little
ability to change things.
-=R


On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote:

> On 2013-11-17 17:53, Mike Belshe wrote:
>
>> OK - I see.
>>
>> I think you're mixing current stats (only 30% of sites today have certs
>> - seems high?) with incompatibilities - 100% of sites can get certs
>> today if they want them.  So HTTP/2 requiring certs would not be
>> introducing any technical incompatibility (like running on port 100
>> would).
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
> So we are optimistic that servers can be fixed to use proper certs, but
> pessimistic that bugs in middleware will be fixed?
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 17 November 2013 22:32:08 UTC

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