On 2012-01-15 23:24, Adam Barth wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Julian Reschke<julian.resc...@gmx.de> wrote:
On 2012-01-15 22:53, Adam Barth wrote:
...
It's definitely messy.
I don't think it matters much what we write in this document. Even if
we spec quoted-string, I doubt many folks will implement it. However,
we can deal with that problem when it comes time to add extension
values that actually used quoted-string.
...
Apologies for the direct question: just 14 days ago you stated that you did
not implement q-s in Chrome, and that you don't intend to:
AB> Chrome does not (and will not) implement quoted-string for the STS
AB> header for the reasons I've explained previously. You're welcome to
AB> file bugs, but I'm just going to close them WONTFIX.
That's somewhat different from what you say now.
Is "the extensions do not exist yet" the excuse for not implementing what
the spec says? Will you be around for fixing Chrome when the first bug
reports because of broken extensions come in?
I don't plan to implement quoted-string in Chrome. I'm saying that
I'm not going to object to writing quoted-string into the spec. I
still think it's a bad idea, but I'm dropping my objection to it.
So when the bug reports come in, *somebody else* is going to fix Chrome?
I really want to know.
_______________________________________________
websec mailing list
websec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec
