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

Re: WG Review: HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:05:57 +0200
Message-ID: <471640F5.6090109@gmx.de>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
CC: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> ...
> I would prefer that the IESG decide whether or not RFC 2616 needs
> to be updated by a working group.  I would prefer that it not make
> any technical decisions for that working group through the
> imposition of charter constraints.
> ...

I believe the current charter proposal attempts to constrain what we are 
doing in order:

- to avoid future requests to invent new authentication mechanisms 
(recall the long discussion about mandatory-to-implement security),

- to avoid that the (IMHO) most important part of the activity gets 
delayed because we're getting sidetracked too much by other nice-to-have 
stuff,

- to attract contributors who may be willing to invest their time only 
if there's a chance to produce a new document within a certain amount of 
time.

Personally I really don't care *how* we manage that. Whatever we do, I 
want to be sure that we can publish one document or a set of documents 
in 12 months without *then* being asked for a mandatory-to-implement 
security mechanism.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2007 17:06:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:23 GMT