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

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

From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:32:15 -0400
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <tslejftpbb4.fsf@mit.edu>

>>>>> "Roy" == Roy T Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> writes:

    Roy> On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
    >> Another important aspect of the charter scope constraint is to
    >> make sure that if the scope is expanded to include new headers
    >> or methods, the entire IETF community is notified so people not
    >> currently participating in the effort can join.

    Roy> There is no scope currently.  After the IESG makes its
    Roy> decision, then the approved charter is sent to the IETF
    Roy> community and thereby notified of the scope by that charter.

There is a proposed scope.

    >> As such, I believe it is appropriate for the IETF community to
    >> place this constraint on the HTTP working group.

    Roy> Your logic escapes me.  I think it is important for the IESG
    Roy> to realize that the IETF community is not yet even fully
    Roy> aware that the working group has been proposed, 

It is our standard process to inform the ietf community of proposed
working groups through mail to ietf-announce; that has been done.
ALso, as is our common practice, we held a BOF on this issue.  The
scope restrictions at this time were discussed at the BOF.  It is my
opinion that there was broad support in the BOF for this scope

You are correct that many people interested in HTTP may not currently
be part of the IETF community.  However I think that there are enough
people who are part of the IETF community who desire this scope
restriction that it has community support.
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2007 23:32:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:43 UTC