cti-taxii — archive

Re: [cti-taxii] Open question: Server and User-Agent headers

From: Bret Jordan <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 02:29:00 -0000

Terry, The MIME types say that it is STIX content or TAXII content. What people are asking for is the ability broadcast the type and version of the server / client. Bret From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Terry MacDonald <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 4:20:50 PM To: Allan Thomson Cc: Mark Davidson; [email protected] Subject: Re: [cti-taxii] Open question: Server and User-Agent headers Hi, I'm not sure why we would need a MUST for the server or user-agent. What benefits does this bring? We already have a MIME type that will cover this sort of information...do we really need it in the Server and User-Agent as well? Seems like unneeded extra complication to me. Cheers Terry MacDonald Chief Product Officer M: +64 211 918 814 E: [email protected] W: www.cosive.com On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Allan Thomson < [email protected] > wrote: Mark – when we say ‘specify TAXII implementation’ within the server or user-agent, can we be more prescriptive and define the exact value that should be included? Given that both server and user-agents will likely have multiple values in them (for shared services on the same server) then we will want to avoid ambiguity and conflicts as much as possible. [TAXII Servers] MUST include ‘taxii /2.0’ within the Server: header 2. [TAXII Clients] MUST include ‘taxii /2.0’ within the User-Agent: header or similar. allan From: < [email protected]. org > on behalf of Mark Davidson < [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 1:05 PM To: " [email protected]. org " < [email protected]. org > Subject: [cti-taxii] Open question: Server and User-Agent headers All, In reviewing the TAXII specification, the editors came across a document suggestion that was discussed on the call, and no clear resolution was arrived at. The suggestion is that the following sentences be added to the conformance requirements for TAXII Server and TAXII Client, respectively: 1. [TAXII Servers] MUST specify TAXII implementation within the Server: header 2. [TAXII Clients] MUST specify TAXII implementation within the User-Agent: header I’d like to resolve this proposal with one of the following outcomes: 1. Accept proposal as-is 2. Accept a modification of the proposal 3. Reject the proposal Please let me know what you think. Thank you. -Mark Disclaimer: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, distributing, copying, or in any way using this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and destroy and delete any copies you may have received.