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

Re: WGLC comment on draft-ietf-httpbis-encryption-encoding-03, was: Encryption content coding simplification

From: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 09:10:46 +0300 (EEST)
To: HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Message-Id: <20161015061047.D4DC816AEF@welho-filter4.welho.com>

> I also agree with PHK that if we add a new header field to specify 
> content coding parameters, it should be applicable to any new encoding, 
> not just Encryption codings (yes, that's just a naming issue).

> With that, I actually end up with something similar to one of PHK's 
> proposals:
>	Content-Encoding: aesgcm, aesgcm
>	CE-params: aesgcm;key="csPJEXBYA5U-Tal9EdJi-w";
>		    salt="NfzOeuV5USPRA-n_9s1Lag",
>                   aesgcm
> ...where the only difference is that any content coding that *can* have 
> parameters MUST have an associated entry in CE-params.

This looks like good idea and is unambiguous.

Also matches to "h1_common_structure" on 

3.  HTTP/1 serialization of HTTP header Common Structure

So that is "list of named dictionaries" as Poul-Henning Kamp 
wrote. ☺

/ Kari Hurtta
Received on Saturday, 15 October 2016 06:11:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 15 October 2016 06:11:20 UTC