W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: I-D draft-petersson-forwarded-for-01.txt

From: Andreas Petersson <andreas@sbin.se>
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2011 16:00:51 +0200
Message-ID: <4E905793.6010008@sbin.se>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 10/6/11 6:21 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 20:12:13 +0200, Andreas Petersson wrote:
>> On 10/5/11 12:38 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>> In message <20111005123338.320c38d4@hetzer>, Andreas Petersson writes:
>>>
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-petersson-forwarded-for-01.txt
>>>>
>>>> Please comment.
>>>
>>> ]       proto-kv   = "proto=" ( "http" | "https" )
>>>
>>> Given Speedy, Websockets and other such experiments, shouldn't this
>>> allow any protocol-name ?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I guess that sounds quite reasonable. But will every protocol
>> always only have one unique name, that everyone would use, without need
>> for discussion?
>>
>> Another, perhaps a non-issue, would be name changes (somewhat like
>> jabber vs. xmpp or yp vs. nis).
> 
> Maybe establish a (lightweight!) registry? Or is there one already?
> 
> 

How about using the URI part "scheme name" ( BCP35,
http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html ) ?

/Andreas
Received on Saturday, 8 October 2011 14:01:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:48 GMT