With Key Pinning being split out from HTTP Strict Transport Security, one
aspect that was lost was the includeSubDomains directive. This was raised
as Issue 56 - http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/websec/trac/ticket/56 -
against draft-03

draft-04 introduces the same directive, and with the same semantics, in
Section 2.1.2 -
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-websec-key-pinning-04#section-2.1.2

Is the added language acceptable? Are there any concerns with the
validation/processing model that would prevent us from closing out this
issue?




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

Reply via email to