- From: Roberto Polli <robipolli@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:56:01 +0100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Hi @all, and thanks for all the feedback provided on digest-headers after IETF106. ## Items we need WG guidance to move on * Validators and Resources [0] [1] [2]: we need some help from editors to clarify the relations b/w validators and digest. * State-changing methods: we clarified Digest semantic for POST and PATCH. As 3230 states that digest is computed on complete representations we are not sure if we can extend this to all (eg. including future) methods which may convey partial representations. Here - https://httpwg.org/http-extensions/ioggstream-952/digest-headers.html#resource-representation we analyze the impacts of method (eg. HEAD), metadata (eg. content-type) and status code (eg. 204) on the payload body iiuc all those should be considered when discussing on digest. * BNF Parameters https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/850 ## Quick win: * Relationship with SRI https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/868 : @Martin if @Lucas 's considerations are enough for you, please close the issue you filed :) ## Closed after Singapore: * Digest of Empty Representation: closed :) https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/849 ## Deferred - Use cases (drafted, to be done) - Usage in signatures (I strongly support this) - Threat model (deferred: maybe another I-D or dismiss) [0]: https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/936 [1]: https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/949 [2]: https://github.com/httpwg/wg-materials/blob/gh-pages/ietf106/minutes.md#issues-936937--discussion-of-how-validators-specify-a-resource
Received on Monday, 25 November 2019 11:56:15 UTC