Re: more flexible ABNF for STS?

2009-11-17 Thread Julian Reschke
=JeffH wrote: In talking with a couple folks in the past few days, it seems that there already is some thinking about adding some additional directives (aka "header field value tokens") to the STS header field. One such idea is an "EVonly" flag with nominal semantics of "accept only an EV cert"

Re: more flexible ABNF for STS?

2009-09-23 Thread Adam Barth
This sounds like a good idea. One thing we can do to reduce the complexity is to have different grammars for server conformance and for user agent conformance. Essentially, servers would be required to conform to the current grammar, but UAs would be required to conform to the more tolerant gramm

more flexible ABNF for STS?

2009-09-21 Thread =JeffH
In talking with a couple folks in the past few days, it seems that there already is some thinking about adding some additional directives (aka "header field value tokens") to the STS header field. One such idea is an "EVonly" flag with nominal semantics of "accept only an EV cert". In general,