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

Alt-Svc WGLC

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 12:23:27 +0100
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <566EA6AF.60100@gmx.de>
Hi there,

thanks for the feedback so far.

With the latest changes for issues 
<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/125> and 
<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/126> (see also 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-latest-from-previous.diff.html>), 
I believe we're almost ready for a new draft and potentially IETF Last Call.

The remaining open points are:

1) In 
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2015OctDec/0375.html>, Hervé 
asked for an example of an ALTSVC frame. I note that the HTTP/2 spec 
doesn't have any examples of frames either, so I'm inclined not to add it.

2) In 
<https://github.com/hruellan/http-extensions/commit/fabd0943cde7e8af07f20b74acc2e48ac16e5f3e>, 
Hervé proposes a change that IMHO is not editorial as it affects a 
normative requirement. Feedback appreciated.

3) Mike Bishop proposed a change in 
<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/101> which I was not 
happy with. Instead, I made the change 
<https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/acc3ae3c4290323069501d55ea8cdb5bacdbc6e8> 
(which is already in the WGLC draft FWIW). Is anybody not ok with this 
resolution?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 14 December 2015 11:23:57 UTC

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