W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-w3c@w3.org > October 2011

Minutes of the W3C/IETF Coordination Call, 2011-09-30

From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 18:27:38 -0600
Message-ID: <4E8CF5FA.4010802@stpeter.im>
To: public-ietf-w3c <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>
Minutes of the W3C/IETF Coordination Call, 2011-09-30


Minutes for W3C/IETF Coordination Call

In Attendance

John Klensin
Mark Nottingham
Thomas Roessler
Peter Saint-Andre
Hannes Tschofenig
Sean Turner

* WebSocket Protocol

Peter: Approval notice for protocol spec sent this morning; now going to
the RFC Editor.

Thomas: Was there any feedback from the W3C?

Peter: We haven't looked into whether there was feedback specifically
from them; didn't track source of various Last Call comments.

* WebSocket API Last Call:


Thomas: Went out this week. Comments by October 21; draft published

Peter: I will post to the HYBI WG list and request their review.

ACTION: Peter to post to the HYBI list about LC.

Thomas: In an ideal world. the publication of the protocol would have
waited for the API LC to have finished.

Peter: We have ways of correcting last-minute problems; it won't be
published yet.

Mark: Sounds like we need a coordination call between the respective
chairs. The consequences of divergence are bad.

Thomas: When?

Peter: Before the end of the API LC, even if it's just for 10 minutes.

Thomas: Before the publication of the protocol spec.

ACTION: Peter to arrange a coordination call with HYBI / WebApps chairs.


Peter: There was activity in July and August. There's been good
discussion of...

1) updating the registration requirements (some open issues);

2) 3987bis - Larry and Martin are meeting in person at the Unicode
Consortium meeting (mid-October) to work through open issues, and

3) processing doc for reference by HTML5. Julian, Chris and others
have worked on two input documents:



But: having trouble finding an editor. Was hoping that Bjoern would do
it, but he can't; going to reach out to Adam Barth, but he may not be
interested (or his interest seems to have waned). Otherwise I'll have to
pay someone or do it myself (half-seriously).

ACTION: Peter to follow up and report back w.r.t. IRI ref doc for HTML5.

Mark: Update on the W3C side?

Thomas: No change; a second LC comment can reopen the discussion.

* WebSec / Web Security

Thomas: Web Application Security WG is chartered; meeting at TPAC. Group
is in startup mode.

Peter: The Web Origin document has gone through the IESG: one issue
remaining. Adam Barth is working on text in Security Considerations
w.r.t. internationalised domain names. Should be done early next week;
so Origin will be approve-able soon.

Peter: There has been progress on HSTS (HTTP Strict Transport Security);
similar issues are outstanding regarding iDNA, HSTS might reference the
Origin spec.

Peter: More general policy discussion hasn't yet happened (for a
framework and/or overview regarding policy in browsers, from a security
perspective). Group is meeting in Taipei; hopefully we'll get progress.

Thomas: There's random chatter about an Origin Pair specification; for
when you want to compare the pair of the outermost origin and the origin
the script executes within. Defends against third-party attacks.

Peter: Possible topic at TPAC?

* JOSE WG (JavaScript Object Signing and Encryption)

note: This work was formerly known as "WOES"

Sean: WG chartered

Thomas: Results from identity workshop continue to be under discussion,
including identity API / crypto API

Peter: JOSE to meet in Taipei?

Sean: I think so.

* W3C Tracking WG

Thomas: kickoff meeting already; lots of discussions. Straw-man drafts
are needed quickly. Editor appointments are important. The technical
specification editor is Roy Fielding.

* MIME sniff reference

Thomas: We have apparently published a REC (Widget Packaging and
Configuration) <http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/> with a reference to the
tools.ietf.org URI of an I-D
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff>. Larry noticed
this; probably a good use case for an erratum. No formal comment yet. See:


Peter: We've had feedback about this from Pete Resnick that it's awful
and ugly. Adam stopped putting energy into it as a result.

Mark: My recollection was that many people (including myself) were OK
with publishing this, as it improves interop (even if many dislike
sniffing). It's a chartered deliverable of an IETF WG; can one person's
objection really stop that?

???: That doesn't sound right.

Peter: We'll try to sort this out in (or before) Taipei.

Thomas: Would need a referenceable spec by April-May 2012.

ACTION: Peter to chase up the status/plan for mime sniffing.


Peter is attending TPAC in November.

ACTION: Peter to contact chairs of relevant WGs.

* Next Call

Week of November 28th?

ACTION: Thomas to schedule / chair

Received on Thursday, 6 October 2011 00:28:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:34 UTC