Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-encryption-encoding

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>: (Tue Jan  3 02:49:00 2017)
> On 23 December 2016 at 18:44, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org> wrote:
> > This is still quite long sentence to parse.
> >
> > |  Clients MUST NOT send http requests over a secured connection, unless the chosen
> > |  alternative service presents a certificate that is valid for the origin as defined in
> > |  {{RFC2818}} (this also establishes "reasonable assurances" for the purposes of
> > |  {RFC7838}}) and they have obtained a valid http-opportunistic response for an origin
> > |  (as per {{well-known}}).
> >
> > OK that is manageable (if I read that several times).
> 
> Yeah, it's hard to parse.  I split it up here:
> 
> https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/280
> 
> Is that clearer?

Hmm. Yes. 
https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/21ff4e285dce0a2895b9b20057a6615e1b55e8a7/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-encryption.md

| Clients MUST NOT send http requests over a secured connection, unless the chosen 
| alternative service presents a certificate that is valid for the origin as defined in 
| {{RFC2818}}. Using an authenticated alternative service establishes "reasonable 
| assurances" for the purposes of {RFC7838}}. In addition to authenticating the server 
| the client MUST have obtained a valid http-opportunistic response for an origin (as per 
| {{well-known}}) using the authenticated connection. An exception to this restriction is 
| made for requests for the "http-opportunistic" well-known URI.

/ Kari Hurtta

Received on Friday, 6 January 2017 19:35:43 UTC