W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2015

Re: Getting draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc to Working Group Last Call

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 11:45:13 +0100
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <564B0539.6060108@gmx.de>
On 2015-11-12 08:32, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> there have been quite a few issues addressed since draft 08, see
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-latest-from-previous.diff.html>.
>
>
> Right now, we have three open issues
> (<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/labels/alt-svc>):
>
> "Reconciling MAY/can vs. SHOULD"
> (<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/101>) - this was
> discussed during the WG session in Yokohama, but I did not agree with
> the outcome. I attempted to address the underlying issue in
> <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/acc3ae3c4290323069501d55ea8cdb5bacdbc6e8>
> and currently wait for feedback on it. (And I'd like to have this
> resolved before submitting the next draft).
>
> The two other issues are:
>
> "alt-svc from https (1.1) to https (1.1)"
> (<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/91>) and "alt-svc vs
> the ability to convey the scheme inside the protocol"
> (<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/92>) are related and
> were both raised by me. Let's get to them once we have a new draft and
> then try to finish up...

For these two Mark proposed text that got positive feedback, see 
<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/92>. I thus made this 
change (with minor tuning) and submitted draft 09 which might be 
suitable for Working Group Last Call...

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2015 10:45:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:40 UTC