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

Re: RIP: Crypto-Key header field

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 11:29:06 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVuS8qJH7THnsQPGYwooby7Hkn=wfv0jHDDkBL5z2Ko4w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 24 November 2016 at 17:20, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Which?

Webpush was considering using the field.  It's not final yet, but only
because there are questions about how to signal keys elsewhere, but
you can see a preview:

>> a usage that needs strings, then UTF-8 is available to them.
> Which implies that those who define the use of dictionaries and the way they
> are transmitted have full control over what keyids are used. Is this the
> case?

I don't see why not.  For instance, out-of-band can easily restrict
this to UTF-8 (or if you get hit on the head some time in the near
future, the special JSON UTF-16 with unpaired surrogates mess).
Received on Friday, 25 November 2016 00:29:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:56 UTC