Subject: Re: Adoption of draft-richanna-http-message-signatures

From: Roberto Polli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 11:51:01 +0200

Dear all,

congrats to Annabelle & co for the adoption of the draft.

- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-message-signatures/

@Mark, Tommy should we add it to
https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions as it's under httpbis?

have a nice day,
R:

Il giorno mer 4 mar 2020 alle ore 00:05 Mark Nottingham
<[email-masked]> ha scritto:
>
> WG participants,
>
> After consultation with the Security and ART Area Directors, we will be adopting this document.
>
> However, we will need to liaise with the just-forming WPACK Working Group to try to avoid duplicated effort; if the solution we deliver can be adjusted (if necessary) to meet their needs, that would be a desirable outcome.
>
> Also, we will consider the architectural issues raised during the CfA period as being in-scope; in particular, our solution should work well with Encrypted Content-Encoding (RFC8188), and draft-thomson-http-content-signature should be considered as an input document.
>
> As has been the case for many of our other drafts, adoption of this draft does _not_ signal consensus on any of its contents -- it is only considered a starting point, and we can change any (or all) of its contents as we progress. As such, please consider adoption as a signal of start of work in an area, rather than a strong indicator of direction.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark and Tommy, HTTP WG Chairs