W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: port #?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:36:26 +0200
Message-ID: <51B19B8A.2000800@gmx.de>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-06-07 10:02, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I note that we still haven't cleaned up the connection model
> sufficiently.  When someone implements a specification they need to know
> at least the port number to connect to. This is the document that has to
> specify at least at a bare minimum how that happens.  This can be
> handled in at least one of four ways:
>
> 1.  We refer to RFC-2616 normatively.  This implies that we will not
> obsolete 2616 at this time.  If we do so later we would need to pull the
> HTTP URI definition out and update the IANA definition.

Hm, no. draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging is what's relevant (and should 
stay relevant).

> ...


Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 08:36:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:13 UTC