Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

encode and sign the ext option #37

Conversation

flitbit
Copy link

@flitbit flitbit commented Jan 27, 2015

The signing spec/guide indicates that an optional extensions can be encoded in an http signature but the reference implementation did not enable such. This pull request modifies the signer to encode the ext option if specified by the caller. I also added a signer test and verify test for this scenario.

Regards.

@pfmooney
Copy link
Contributor

Looking at the relevant section of the draft specification, I believe the extensions parameter is not meant to simply be included as a string value. Given that, I'm more inclined to change the documentation to state that extensions is reserved for future use and omit any implementation details for now.

@pfmooney pfmooney self-assigned this Jan 27, 2015
@flitbit
Copy link
Author

flitbit commented Jan 27, 2015

Well yes. I got in the lazy habit of referring to the markdown description rather than the draft because the markdown description is more human friendly. But I see what you mean and I will revise approach. It is a pity however that the draft has expired and there is no actual "Signature Authentication Scheme Registry" at IANA (that I can find).

@flitbit flitbit closed this Jan 27, 2015
@flitbit flitbit deleted the add-optional-ext-encoding-to-reference-implementation branch February 11, 2015 04:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants