Re: Mandatory

From: David W. Morris (dwm@xpasc.com)
Date: Wed, Apr 08 1998


Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 10:29:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: "David W. Morris" <dwm@xpasc.com>
To: hardie@nic.nasa.gov
cc: ietf-http-ext@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980408102351.14898C-100000@shell1.aimnet.com>
Subject: Re: Mandatory



On Wed, 8 Apr 1998 hardie@nic.nasa.gov wrote:

> (Henrik)
> I have two points here: First, I disagree that HTTP defines end-to-end to
> mean from the user agent to the origin server. For example, the text in
> 13.5.1 says

Perhaps this reading might hold legally, but the understanding I've had
from following the HTTP mail list is that end-end means client to origin
server. I too had/have a problem with use of end-end in the mandatory
draft. It was confusing at best.

> However, that being said - I don't want to upheld the draft on essentially
> a question of terminology and if we can come up with another term than
> end-to-end then let's do that. Other names are welcome - or if you can
> provide wording that makes the distinction clear. I have added this as an
> item on the issues list.

'Multi-hop' or 'multi-point' would convey the fact that what is meant is
anything which isn't hop-hop and since it isn't a term with prior use
in the HTTP context, the reader would read the text before believing
s/he understood the meaning.

Dave Morris