W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2016

Re: #148: Reasonable Assurances and H2C

From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:37:10 -0500
Message-ID: <CALaySJJz_FK=JRtEPo1PH5VTJb=XbUJZE711hBLKadrdsvt_Lw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
>>>   For the purposes of this document, "reasonable assurances" can be
>>>   established through use of a TLS-based protocol with the certificate
>>>   checks defined in [RFC2818].  Other means of establishing them MUST
>>>   be documented in an RFC that updates this specification.  Clients MAY
>>>   impose additional criteria for establishing reasonable assurances.
>> As far as I understand, this is a hook for draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption-03,
>> which is currently labeled "experimental". It is my understanding that
>> experimental RFCs will have a hard time "updating" a standards-track
>> RFC, though...
> Barry, any insights here?

Yeh, why is "that updates this document" there?  Why do readers of
this document have to know about means that are provided in other
documents, such that "updates" is needed?

Received on Friday, 26 February 2016 14:37:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 22 March 2016 12:47:11 UTC