W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: WG Review: Recharter of Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis)

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:52:37 +0100
Message-ID: <4C9026E5.6070106@webr3.org>
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
CC: iesg@ietf.org, IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>, mnot@pobox.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
diff:
It will also incorporate the generic authentication framework from RFC
2617, without obsoleting or updating that specification's definition of
the Basic and Digest schemes.

Finally, it will incorporate relevant portions of RFC 2817 (in
particular, the CONNECT method and advice on the use of Upgrade), so
that that specification can be moved to Historic status.

and the dates, afaict.

Best,

Nathan

Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> Would it be possible to get an overview diff for what is (proposed to 
> be) changing? (I think such a diff should always be provided for 
> proposals for charter updates.)
> 
> Regards,   Martin.
> 
> On 2010/09/15 7:26, IESG Secretary wrote:
>> A modified charter has been submitted for the Hypertext Transfer Protocol
>> Bis (httpbis) working group in the Applications Area of the IETF.  The
>> IESG has not made any determination as yet.  The modified charter is
>> provided below for informational purposes only.  Please send your 
>> comments
>> to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by September 21, 2010.
>>
>> Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis (httpbis)
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> Current Status: Active Working Group
>>
>> Last modified: 2010-09-02
>>
>> Chairs:
>>    Mark Nottingham (mnot@pobox.com)
>>
>> Applications Area Director(s):
>>    Alexey Melnikov (alexey.melnikov@isode.com)
>>    Peter Saint Andre (stpeter@stpeter.im)
>>
>> Applications Area Advisor:
>>    Alexey Melnikov (alexey.melnikov@isode.com)
>>
>> Mailing Lists:
>>    General Discussion: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
>>    To Subscribe:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
>>    Subject: subscribe
>>    Archive: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/
>>
>> Description of Working Group
>>
>> HTTP is one of the most successful and widely-used protocols on the
>> Internet today. However, its specification has several editorial issues.
>> Additionally, after years of implementation and extension, several
>> ambiguities have become evident, impairing interoperability and the
>> ability to easily implement and use HTTP.
>>
>> The working group will refine RFC2616 to:
>> * Incorporate errata and updates (e.g., references, IANA registries,
>>    ABNF)
>> * Fix editorial problems which have led to misunderstandings of the
>>    specification
>> * Clarify conformance requirements
>> * Remove known ambiguities where they affect interoperability
>> * Clarify existing methods of extensibility
>> * Remove or deprecate those features that are not widely implemented and
>>    also unduly affect interoperability
>> * Where necessary, add implementation advice
>> * Document the security properties of HTTP and its associated mechanisms
>>    (e.g., Basic and Digest authentication, cookies, TLS) for common
>>    applications
>>
>> It will also incorporate the generic authentication framework from RFC
>> 2617, without obsoleting or updating that specification's definition of
>> the Basic and Digest schemes.
>>
>> Finally, it will incorporate relevant portions of RFC 2817 (in
>> particular, the CONNECT method and advice on the use of Upgrade), so
>> that that specification can be moved to Historic status.
>>
>> In doing so, it should consider:
>> * Implementer experience
>> * Demonstrated use of HTTP
>> * Impact on existing implementations and deployments
>>
>> The Working Group must not introduce a new version of HTTP and should
>> not add new functionality to HTTP. The WG is not tasked with producing
>> new methods, headers, or extension mechanisms, but may introduce new
>> protocol elements if necessary as part of revising existing
>> functionality which has proven to be problematic.
>>
>> The Working Group's specification deliverables are:
>> * A document (or set of documents) that is suitable to supersede RFC
>>    2616 and move RFC 2817 to Historic status
>> * A document cataloguing the security properties of HTTP
>>
>> Goals and Milestones
>>
>> Done      First HTTP Revision Internet Draft
>> Done      First HTTP Security Properties Internet Draft
>> Nov 2010  Request Last Call for HTTP Revision
>> Nov 2010  Request Last Call for HTTP Security Properties
>> Apr 2011  Submit HTTP Revision to IESG for consideration as a Draft
>>            Standard
>> Apr 2011  Submit HTTP Security Properties to IESG for consideration as
>>            Informational
>>
>>
> 
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2010 01:53:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:25 GMT