W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2007

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

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 10:24:58 +0100
Message-ID: <45D81B6A.7040205@gmx.de>
To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

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
Received on Sunday, 18 February 2007 09:25:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:00 GMT