Re: [NEW ISSUE] HTTP status code registry, was: Status 102

Henrik Nordstrom schrieb:
> lör 2007-02-17 klockan 19:23 +0100 skrev Julian Reschke:
> 
>> I wasn't aware of the registry, nor were many other people I asked. It's 
>> very well hidden in RFC2817 ("Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1").
>>
>> So how about moving it into a separate spec for easier maintenance, and 
>> better visibility?
> 
> Or better yet add the IANA http status code registry reference to
> RFC2616bis declaring that IANA is responsible for maintaining the status
> code registry?

That's of course ok as well, but at this point we can't be sure that 
there will be a RFC2616bis anytime soon.

> Having "registry" type RFCs never works out well as these needs to be
> updated before the next draft needing a new status code is published.
> This job is much better done by IANA.

Yep. This one is not intended to be one of those. It only has a list in 
order to update what's there.

 > ...

Best regards, Julian