- From: Pearl Liang via RT <drafts-lastcall@iana.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:55:29 +0000
- CC: martin.thomson@gmail.com, httpbis-chairs@tools.ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, draft-ietf-httpbis-http2.all@tools.ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
Hi Martin, On Tue Jan 13 18:17:09 2015, martin.thomson@gmail.com wrote: > Thanks Pearl, > > I assume that the "NOT OK" refers to the need for expert review. Or > are you concerned about us requesting a specific number (421) for the > last action? > Yes, the former. If you have already received the approval from the designated experts, respectively, please let us know. > On 13 January 2015 at 09:50, Pearl Liang via RT > <drafts-lastcall@iana.org> wrote: > > a new method will be registered as follows: > > > > Method Name: PRI > > Safe: No > > Idempotent: No > > Reference: [ RFC-to-be ] > > > > Question: just to double check if the new requested method "PRI" is > an abbreviation. > > It appears that RFC7231 does not require a full name. > > That is correct. Method names don't require a full name. In this > case, a full name could be confusing, since this is a defensive > registration only. > AOK. Btw, that is not the reason for IANA not okay. Thanks, ~pl
Received on Wednesday, 14 January 2015 08:09:39 UTC