Re: RFC7512 PKCS#11 URI support

On Mon, 2016-04-04 at 15:49 -0700, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> I appreciate your argument "but user provided!", but you seem to be
> missing the core point - you're changing the syntax of an API's
> arguments, in a way that breaks the previously-held pre and post
> conditions. That's an API change.
> 
> If we can't agree on that, then it's no surprise that you don't agree
> with or appreciate the objections, but I'm not sure what more can be
> said, or needs to be said. It seems we've reached an ideological
> impasse.

Of course it's an API change. But as noted, it's an API *addition*, in
that it makes something work that didn't before.

The criterion for such additions should be "if it isn't a *bad* thing
for that to start working".

What's missing from your argument is the bit where you explain why it's
*bad* for an explicitly user-entered PKCS#11 URI to suddenly start
working. That was, after all, the *point* of suggesting that the
existing functions should be changed to accept such.

-- 
dwmw2

-- 
dev-tech-crypto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto