draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-06.txt   draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-07.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force B. Campbell Internet Engineering Task Force B. Campbell
Internet-Draft Ping Identity Internet-Draft Ping Identity
Intended status: Standards Track July 27, 2018 Intended status: Standards Track October 19, 2018
Expires: January 28, 2019 Expires: April 22, 2019
HTTPS Token Binding with TLS Terminating Reverse Proxies HTTPS Token Binding with TLS Terminating Reverse Proxies
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-06 draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-07
Abstract Abstract
This document defines HTTP header fields that enable a TLS This document defines HTTP header fields that enable a TLS
terminating reverse proxy to convey information to a backend server terminating reverse proxy to convey information to a backend server
about the validated Token Binding Message received from a client, about the validated Token Binding Message received from a client,
which enables that backend server to bind, or verify the binding of, which enables that backend server to bind, or verify the binding of,
cookies and other security tokens to the client's Token Binding key. cookies and other security tokens to the client's Token Binding key.
This facilitates the reverse proxy and backend server functioning This facilitates the reverse proxy and backend server functioning
together as though they are a single logical server side deployment together as though they are a single logical server side deployment
skipping to change at page 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 28, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 22, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Notation and Conventions . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Notation and Conventions . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. HTTP Header Fields and Processing Rules . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. HTTP Header Fields and Processing Rules . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.1. Token Binding ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1.1. Token Binding ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.2. Token Binding Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1.2. Token Binding Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Token Binding ID HTTP Header Fields . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. Token Binding ID HTTP Header Fields . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Processing Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3. Processing Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.4. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4.1. Provided Token Binding ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.4.1. Provided Token Binding ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4.2. Provided and Referred Token Binding IDs . . . . . . . 7 2.4.2. Provided and Referred Token Binding IDs . . . . . . . 7
2.4.3. Provided and Other Token Binding IDs . . . . . . . . 8 2.4.3. Provided and Other Token Binding IDs . . . . . . . . 8
3. TLS Versions and Best Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. TLS Versions and Best Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. HTTP Message Header Field Names Registration . . . . . . 10 5.1. HTTP Message Header Field Names Registration . . . . . . 10
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix B. Document History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Token Binding over HTTP [I-D.ietf-tokbind-https] provides a mechanism Token Binding over HTTP [RFC8473] provides a mechanism that enables
that enables HTTP servers to cryptographically bind cookies and other HTTP servers to cryptographically bind cookies and other security
security tokens to a key generated by the client. When the use of tokens to a key generated by the client. When the use of Token
Token Binding is negotiated in the TLS [RFC5246] handshake Binding is negotiated in the TLS [RFC5246] handshake [RFC8472] the
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-negotiation] the client sends an encoded Token client sends an encoded Token Binding Message [RFC8471] as a header
Binding Message [I-D.ietf-tokbind-protocol] as a header in each HTTP in each HTTP request, which proves possession of one or more private
request, which proves possession of one or more private keys held by keys held by the client. The public portion of the keys are
the client. The public portion of the keys are represented in the represented in the Token Binding IDs of the Token Binding Message and
Token Binding IDs of the Token Binding Message and for each one there for each one there is a signature over some data, which includes the
is a signature over some data, which includes the exported keying exported keying material [RFC5705] of the TLS connection. An HTTP
material [RFC5705] of the TLS connection. An HTTP server issuing server issuing cookies or other security tokens can associate them
cookies or other security tokens can associate them with the Token with the Token Binding ID, which ensures those tokens cannot be used
Binding ID, which ensures those tokens cannot be used successfully successfully over a different TLS connection or by a different client
over a different TLS connection or by a different client than the one than the one to which they were issued.
to which they were issued.
A fairly common deployment architecture for HTTPS applications is to A fairly common deployment architecture for HTTPS applications is to
have the backend HTTP application servers sit behind a reverse proxy have the backend HTTP application servers sit behind a reverse proxy
that terminates TLS connections from clients. The proxy is that terminates TLS connections from clients. The proxy is
accessible to the internet and dispatches client requests to the accessible to the internet and dispatches client requests to the
appropriate backend server within a private or protected network. appropriate backend server within a private or protected network.
The backend servers are not directly accessible by clients and are The backend servers are not directly accessible by clients and are
only reachable through the reverse proxy. The details of such only reachable through the reverse proxy. The details of such
deployments are typically opaque to clients who make requests to the deployments are typically opaque to clients who make requests to the
proxy server and see responses as though they originated from the proxy server and see responses as though they originated from the
skipping to change at page 4, line 6 skipping to change at page 4, line 4
1.1. Requirements Notation and Conventions 1.1. Requirements Notation and Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
2. HTTP Header Fields and Processing Rules 2. HTTP Header Fields and Processing Rules
2.1. Encoding 2.1. Encoding
The field-values of the HTTP headers defined herein utilize the The field-values of the HTTP headers defined herein utilize the
following encoded forms. following encoded forms.
2.1.1. Token Binding ID 2.1.1. Token Binding ID
A Token Binding ID is represented as an "EncodedTokenBindingID", A Token Binding ID is represented as an "EncodedTokenBindingID",
which is thea base64url encoding of the TokenBindingID byte sequence which is thea base64url encoding of the TokenBindingID byte sequence
(see section 3 of [I-D.ietf-tokbind-protocol]) using the URL and (see section 3 of [RFC8471]) using the URL and filename safe alphabet
filename safe alphabet described in Section 5 of [RFC4648], with all described in Section 5 of [RFC4648], with all trailing pad characters
trailing pad characters '=' omitted and without the inclusion of any '=' omitted and without the inclusion of any line breaks, whitespace,
line breaks, whitespace, or other additional characters. ABNF or other additional characters. ABNF [RFC5234] syntax for
[RFC5234] syntax for "EncodedTokenBindingID" is shown in Figure 1 "EncodedTokenBindingID" is shown in Figure 1 below.
below.
EncodedTokenBindingID = *( DIGIT / ALPHA / "-" / "_" ) EncodedTokenBindingID = *( DIGIT / ALPHA / "-" / "_" )
DIGIT = <Defined in Section B.1 of [RFC5234]> DIGIT = <Defined in Section B.1 of [RFC5234]>
ALPHA = <Defined in Section B.1 of [RFC5234]> ALPHA = <Defined in Section B.1 of [RFC5234]>
Figure 1: Encoded Token Binding ID ABNF Figure 1: Encoded Token Binding ID ABNF
2.1.2. Token Binding Type 2.1.2. Token Binding Type
skipping to change at page 4, line 45 skipping to change at page 4, line 41
below. below.
EncodedTokenBindingType = 1*2HEXDIG EncodedTokenBindingType = 1*2HEXDIG
HEXDIG = <Defined in Section B.1 of [RFC5234]> HEXDIG = <Defined in Section B.1 of [RFC5234]>
Figure 2: Encoded Token Binding Type ABNF Figure 2: Encoded Token Binding Type ABNF
2.2. Token Binding ID HTTP Header Fields 2.2. Token Binding ID HTTP Header Fields
The Token Binding Protocol [I-D.ietf-tokbind-protocol] recommends The Token Binding Protocol [RFC8471] recommends that implementations
that implementations make Token Binding IDs available to the make Token Binding IDs available to the application as opaque byte
application as opaque byte sequences, enabling those applications to sequences, enabling those applications to use the Token Binding IDs
use the Token Binding IDs when generating and verifying bound tokens. when generating and verifying bound tokens. In the context of a TLS
In the context of a TLS terminating reverse proxy (TTRP) deployment, terminating reverse proxy (TTRP) deployment, the TTRP makes the Token
the TTRP makes the Token Binding ID(s) available to the backend Binding ID(s) available to the backend application with the following
application with the following header fields. header fields.
Sec-Provided-Token-Binding-ID Sec-Provided-Token-Binding-ID
The Token Binding ID of the provided Token Binding represented as The Token Binding ID of the provided Token Binding represented as
an "EncodedTokenBindingID". an "EncodedTokenBindingID".
Sec-Referred-Token-Binding-ID Sec-Referred-Token-Binding-ID
The Token Binding ID of the referred Token Binding represented as The Token Binding ID of the referred Token Binding represented as
an "EncodedTokenBindingID". an "EncodedTokenBindingID".
Sec-Other-Token-Binding-ID Sec-Other-Token-Binding-ID
skipping to change at page 5, line 31 skipping to change at page 5, line 27
[RFC7230], which MUST NOT have a list of values or occur multiple [RFC7230], which MUST NOT have a list of values or occur multiple
times in a request. times in a request.
All header fields defined herein are only for use in HTTP requests All header fields defined herein are only for use in HTTP requests
and MUST NOT to be used in HTTP responses. and MUST NOT to be used in HTTP responses.
2.3. Processing Rules 2.3. Processing Rules
This section defines the applicable processing rules for a TLS This section defines the applicable processing rules for a TLS
terminating reverse proxy (TTRP) and backend server(s) to provide terminating reverse proxy (TTRP) and backend server(s) to provide
server side support of Token Binding over HTTP server side support of Token Binding over HTTP [RFC8473] using the
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-https] using the HTTP headers described in HTTP headers described in Section 2.2. Use of the technique is to be
Section 2.2. Use of the technique is to be a configuration or a configuration or deployment option and the processing rules
deployment option and the processing rules described herein are for described herein are for servers operating with that option enabled.
servers operating with that option enabled.
A TTRP negotiates the use of Token Binding with the client, such as A TTRP negotiates the use of Token Binding with the client, such as
is described in [I-D.ietf-tokbind-negotiation] and validates the is described in [RFC8472] and validates the Token Binding Message as
Token Binding Message as defined in The Token Binding Protocol defined in The Token Binding Protocol [RFC8471] and Token Binding
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-protocol] and Token Binding over HTTP over HTTP [RFC8473] for each HTTP request on the underlying TLS
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-https] for each HTTP request on the underlying TLS
connection. Requests with a valid Token Binding Message (and meeting connection. Requests with a valid Token Binding Message (and meeting
any other authorization or policy requirements of the TTRP) are any other authorization or policy requirements of the TTRP) are
dispatched to the backend server with the following modifications. dispatched to the backend server with the following modifications.
1. The "Sec-Token-Binding" header in the original incoming request 1. The "Sec-Token-Binding" header in the original incoming request
MUST be removed from the request that is dispatched to the MUST be removed from the request that is dispatched to the
backend server. backend server.
2. The Token Binding ID of the provided Token Binding of the Token 2. The Token Binding ID of the provided Token Binding of the Token
Binding Message MUST be placed in the "Sec-Provided-Token- Binding Message MUST be placed in the "Sec-Provided-Token-
skipping to change at page 9, line 4 skipping to change at page 8, line 46
q3qbrcHLxvWW-E36f06xBOGguibMqkyJxJkbBHXrqOmWFuSOsWwfN02rMsUUSEJP2 q3qbrcHLxvWW-E36f06xBOGguibMqkyJxJkbBHXrqOmWFuSOsWwfN02rMsUUSEJP2
zSletxuk4exmelFKSaE zSletxuk4exmelFKSaE
Figure 8: Headers in HTTP Request to Backend Server Figure 8: Headers in HTTP Request to Backend Server
3. TLS Versions and Best Practices 3. TLS Versions and Best Practices
TLS 1.2 [RFC5246] is cited in this document because, at the time of TLS 1.2 [RFC5246] is cited in this document because, at the time of
writing, it is the latest version that is widely deployed. However, writing, it is the latest version that is widely deployed. However,
this document is applicable with other TLS versions that allow for this document is applicable with other TLS versions that allow for
negotiating the use of Token Binding. [I-D.ietf-tokbind-tls13], for negotiating the use of Token Binding. Token Binding for Transport
example, describes Token Binding for TLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-tls13]. Layer Security (TLS) Version 1.3 Connections
Implementation security considerations for TLS, including version [I-D.ietf-tokbind-tls13], for example, describes Token Binding with
recommendations, can be found in Recommendations for Secure Use of TLS 1.3 [RFC8446]. Implementation security considerations for TLS,
Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security including version recommendations, can be found in Recommendations
(DTLS) [BCP195]. for Secure Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram
Transport Layer Security (DTLS) [BCP195].
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
The headers described herein enable a reverse proxy and backend The headers described herein enable a reverse proxy and backend
server to function together as though they are a single logical server to function together as though they are a single logical
server side deployment of HTTPS Token Binding. Use of the headers server side deployment of HTTPS Token Binding. Use of the headers
outside that intended use case, however, may undermine the outside that intended use case, however, may undermine the
protections afforded by Token Binding. Therefore steps MUST be taken protections afforded by Token Binding. Therefore steps MUST be taken
to prevent unintended use, both in sending the headers and in relying to prevent unintended use, both in sending the headers and in relying
on their value. on their value.
skipping to change at page 10, line 43 skipping to change at page 10, line 38
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[BCP195] Sheffer, Y., Holz, R., and P. Saint-Andre, [BCP195] Sheffer, Y., Holz, R., and P. Saint-Andre,
"Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer "Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer
Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security
(DTLS)", BCP 195, RFC 7525, DOI 10.17487/RFC7525, May (DTLS)", BCP 195, RFC 7525, DOI 10.17487/RFC7525, May
2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp195>. 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp195>.
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-https]
Popov, A., Nystrom, M., Balfanz, D., Langley, A., Harper,
N., and J. Hodges, "Token Binding over HTTP", draft-ietf-
tokbind-https-12 (work in progress), January 2018.
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-negotiation]
Popov, A., Nystrom, M., Balfanz, D., and A. Langley,
"Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extension for Token
Binding Protocol Negotiation", draft-ietf-tokbind-
negotiation-10 (work in progress), October 2017.
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-protocol]
Popov, A., Nystrom, M., Balfanz, D., Langley, A., and J.
Hodges, "The Token Binding Protocol Version 1.0", draft-
ietf-tokbind-protocol-16 (work in progress), October 2017.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data [RFC4648] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data
Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006, Encodings", RFC 4648, DOI 10.17487/RFC4648, October 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4648>.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
skipping to change at page 11, line 48 skipping to change at page 11, line 23
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer [RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing",
RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014, RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8471] Popov, A., Ed., Nystroem, M., Balfanz, D., and J. Hodges,
"The Token Binding Protocol Version 1.0", RFC 8471,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8471, October 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8471>.
[RFC8472] Popov, A., Ed., Nystroem, M., and D. Balfanz, "Transport
Layer Security (TLS) Extension for Token Binding Protocol
Negotiation", RFC 8472, DOI 10.17487/RFC8472, October
2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8472>.
[RFC8473] Popov, A., Nystroem, M., Balfanz, D., Ed., Harper, N., and
J. Hodges, "Token Binding over HTTP", RFC 8473,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8473, October 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8473>.
6.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[fetch-spec] [fetch-spec]
WhatWG, "Fetch", Living Standard , WhatWG, "Fetch", Living Standard ,
<https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/>. <https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/>.
[I-D.ietf-tls-tls13]
Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", draft-ietf-tls-tls13-28 (work in progress),
March 2018.
[I-D.ietf-tokbind-tls13] [I-D.ietf-tokbind-tls13]
Harper, N., "Token Binding for Transport Layer Security Harper, N., "Token Binding for Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Version 1.3 Connections", draft-ietf-tokbind- (TLS) Version 1.3 Connections", draft-ietf-tokbind-
tls13-01 (work in progress), May 2018. tls13-01 (work in progress), May 2018.
[RFC3864] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, "Registration [RFC3864] Klyne, G., Nottingham, M., and J. Mogul, "Registration
Procedures for Message Header Fields", BCP 90, RFC 3864, Procedures for Message Header Fields", BCP 90, RFC 3864,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3864, September 2004, DOI 10.17487/RFC3864, September 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3864>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3864>.
[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the following people for their various The author would like to thank the following people for their various
contributions to the specification: Vinod Anupam, Dirk Balfanz, John contributions to the specification: Vinod Anupam, Dirk Balfanz, John
Bradley, William Denniss, Nick Harper, Jeff Hodges, Subodh Iyengar, Bradley, William Denniss, Nick Harper, Jeff Hodges, Subodh Iyengar,
Leif Johansson, Michael B. Jones, Yoav Nir, James Manger, Andrei Leif Johansson, Michael B. Jones, Yoav Nir, James Manger, Andrei
Popov, Eric Rescorla, Piotr Sikora, Martin Thomson, and Hans Zandbelt Popov, Eric Rescorla, Piotr Sikora, Martin Thomson, and Hans Zandbelt
Appendix B. Document History Appendix B. Document History
[[ to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as an RFC ]] [[ to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as an RFC ]]
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-07
o Update TLS 1.3 reference to RFC 8446.
o Update the references to the core token binding specs, which are
now RFCs 8471, 8472, and 8473.
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-06 draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-06
o Move TLS Versions and Best Practices out of Security o Move TLS Versions and Best Practices out of Security
Considerations to its own top-level section. Considerations to its own top-level section.
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-05 draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-05
o Editorial updates. o Editorial updates.
o Change one character in the last example to help emphasize the o Change one character in the last example to help emphasize the
skipping to change at page 13, line 9 skipping to change at page 13, line 5
o Add an example with Sec-Other-Token-Binding-ID. o Add an example with Sec-Other-Token-Binding-ID.
o Use the HEXDIG core ABNF rule for EncodedTokenBindingType and o Use the HEXDIG core ABNF rule for EncodedTokenBindingType and
mention case-insensitive in the text. mention case-insensitive in the text.
o Minor editorial fixes. o Minor editorial fixes.
o Add to the Acknowledgements and remove the 'and others' bit. o Add to the Acknowledgements and remove the 'and others' bit.
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-03
o Add a header to allow for additional token binding types other o Add a header to allow for additional token binding types other
than provided and referred to be conveyed. than provided and referred to be conveyed.
o Reword the Abstract somewhat for (hopefully) improved readability. o Reword the Abstract somewhat for (hopefully) improved readability.
o Minor editorial and formatting updates. o Minor editorial and formatting updates.
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-02 draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-02
o Add to the Acknowledgements. o Add to the Acknowledgements.
skipping to change at page 14, line 5 skipping to change at page 13, line 47
draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-00 draft-ietf-tokbind-ttrp-00
o Initial WG draft from draft-campbell-tokbind-ttrp. o Initial WG draft from draft-campbell-tokbind-ttrp.
draft-campbell-tokbind-ttrp-01 draft-campbell-tokbind-ttrp-01
o Minor editorial fixes. o Minor editorial fixes.
o Add to the Acknowledgements. o Add to the Acknowledgements.
draft-campbell-tokbind-ttrp-00
o Initial draft based on 'consensus to work on the problem' from the o Initial draft based on 'consensus to work on the problem' from the
Seoul meeting [1][2] and reflecting the consensus approach from Seoul meeting [1][2] and reflecting the consensus approach from
discussions at the Chicago meeting [3]. discussions at the Chicago meeting [3].
[1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/minutes/minutes-97- [1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/minutes/minutes-97-
tokbind-01.txt (minutes from Seoul) tokbind-01.txt (minutes from Seoul)
[2] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tokbind- [2] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tokbind-
reverse-proxies-00.pdf (slides from Seoul) reverse-proxies-00.pdf (slides from Seoul)
[3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/
unbearable/_ZHI8y2Vs5WMP8VMRr7zroo_sNU (summary of discussion) unbearable/_ZHI8y2Vs5WMP8VMRr7zroo_sNU (summary of discussion)
 End of changes. 19 change blocks. 
73 lines changed or deleted 73 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/