W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: RFC 3143

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:51:31 +0100
Message-ID: <49425E53.50504@gmx.de>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> Well, 3143 is Informational, and IIRC it was considered as a way to 
> collect industry / community experience at that point in time, not an 
> authoritative list of errata, etc.
> 
> I would treat it as an input document to this work, not necessarily 
> something we have to correct, refute, or harmonise with. If we're 
> interested in correcting other existing documents, I think BCP56 is more 
> important than this one...

It is.

On the other hand, advice like "you can't use extension methods because 
of a proxy requirement in RFC 2616" should be corrected. Does anybody 
recall the background of that? 
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3143#section-2.2.2>)?

BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 12 December 2008 12:52:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:58 GMT