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

Re: Moving forward on improving HTTP's security

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:49:51 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUS9-1sQBPbKJU5JyZ8XAfiqUVVUipKhzwDhOy-pxK_ag@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
On Nov 13, 2013 11:32 AM, "Tao Effect" <contact@taoeffect.com> wrote:
>
> On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:16 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, if we're spreading potentially dangerous misinformation, let's
fix that. Can you identify which internet draft has said information so we
can fix it?
>
> Am I limited to internet drafts? I haven't been following the ones on
HTTP/2.0. Like most people, I'm dazzled by catchy subject titles.

Internet drafts (at least the ones with -ietf- in them) attempt to capture
the current consensus of the writing group, and by extension, the IETF.
They are imperfect, but they really are much better at tracking state than
mailing lists.

I encourage you to stay and help us figure this out. Please remember to
respect the fact that others do want what is best, and that disagreements
generally only arise from small differences in view on what a good outcome
looks like and what the best approach in achieving that outcome might be.
Even if you think someone is a sock puppet (and I certainly don't know of
anyone who I'd apply that label to here), calling them one to their face
isn't going to help.
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2013 19:50:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:19 UTC