Hi all,

<hat="individual">

just a quick update on the status of the informational X-Frame-Options
draft.
First, let me thank everyone for the great reviews and feedback and
apologize for not posting the revised draft earlier. Was a little bit
occupied with other work items and also wanted to give enough time to
thoroughly incorporate all your feedback.

I am very grateful for your reviews and feedback and went through all
the emails and incorporated every bit of review feedback you gave me (in
some cases I received feedback from more than one person on an
individual paragraph in which case I chose the proposals that seemed the
best fit to me).

The revision includes the WGLC feedback from Adam, Alexey, Barry, Brad,
Dave, Jeff, Julian, Mark, Peter and Yoav. And I think it significantly
improved the quality of the draft which was before the WGLC still with a
few typos and not clearly to understand sentences. I hope the revision
does not reflect a good improvement.

Personally, I do not think this update made any major changes to the
draft, especially as it is only documenting what is out there anyway. So
whether we want to re-initiate a second WGLC or submit this to the IESG
for LC, will be up to you and my co-chair Yoav and potentially Alexey
(if he still volunteering to play I-D shepherd for this doc).

Best regards, Tobias




On 26/02/13 03:04, [email protected] wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> directories.
>  This draft is a work item of the Web Security Working Group of the IETF.
>
>       Title           : HTTP Header Field X-Frame-Options
>       Author(s)       : David Ross
>                           Tobias Gondrom
>       Filename        : draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02.txt
>       Pages           : 11
>       Date            : 2013-02-25
>
> Abstract:
>    To improve the protection of web applications against Clickjacking,
>    this specification describes the X-Frame-Options HTTP response header
>    field that declares a policy communicated from the server to the
>    client browser on whether the browser may display the transmitted
>    content in frames that are part of other web pages.  This
>    informational document serves to document the existing use and
>    specification of this X-Frame-Options HTTP response header field.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options
>
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-websec-x-frame-options-02
>
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> websec mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

_______________________________________________
websec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

Reply via email to