Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis

Eliot Lear wrote:
> Mark,
>> Considering the scope of 2616bis is errata, and explicitly not new 
>> features/mechanisms, I'm not sure I follow. Do you think that 
>> designing new auth mechanisms will expose new errata?
>>
>> My initial thought is that it's much more likely that it'll require 
>> who new features, or no changes to HTTP at all.
> 
> If you do the errata and then we need any update to cover authentication 
> - whatsoever - we end up with bisbis.  That's my point.

But that would be an update to RCF2617, not RFC2616bis, right?

Best regards, Julian