-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 379
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
Specify .well-known s2s discovery and X.509 validation #1830
Conversation
Original proposals: * #1708 (note: the JSON requirements were softened by #1824) * #1711 Implementation proofs: * matrix-org/synapse#4489 * No explicit PRs for MSC1711 could be found, however Synapse is known to implement it. There are no intentional changes which differ from the proposals in this commit, however the author has relied upon various historical conversations outside of the proposals to gain the required context. Inaccuracies introduced by the author are purely accidental.
I've requested review from @richvdh specifically as I want to ensure I haven't accidentally screwed up the entire specification for these two proposals. I'm also unsure if any of the perspectives stuff still applies for key exchange, such as the notary servers, and would like some feedback on whether or not that should be removed as well. My understanding is that it is no longer required. |
Original proposal: #1831 Implementation proof: pending
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice and clear. A couple of tweaks needed though.
@richvdh please take another look. Hopefully that's the last bits ironed out now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry I keep finding nits to pick at :/
erm not yet it doesn't (matrix-org/synapse#4366) |
Co-Authored-By: turt2live <[email protected]>
@richvdh no worries on nitpicking: I'd rather it be as perfect as it can be than wrong. Please take another look - I've applied your suggestions manually because the GitHub UI was fighting me. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
(landing this with anticipation that the FCPs are going to clear just fine - if this changes, we'll do the needed) |
Rendered: see 'docs' status check
Note to reviewers: This now includes MSC1831, which means this cannot land until the FCP has cleared.
Original proposals:
Implementation proofs:
There are no intentional changes which differ from the proposals in this commit, however the author has relied upon various historical conversations outside of the proposals to gain the required context. Inaccuracies introduced by the author are purely accidental.