W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2017

Re: Call For Adoption HTTPbis BCP56bis

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 08:49:44 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnW2Z8cmyygXggOaey2OJX2BW_4iDqX0jfnu=2BojA9r6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

BCP 56 hasn't just been overtaken by events, it's reached the point
where it is an active hazard.  I'm glad that Mark started this effort.
I definitely think that this is worth doing.

I have some reservations about some of the document as proposed; the
advice on using HTTP is excellent, but I don't think that the framing
works especially well.  It's too close to the original BCP 56 text.
In particular, the introduction seems to make it clear that there is
more choice and flexibility in terms of how much of HTTP can be used,
where the document later mandates a clear cut: either use it properly
or define a new protocol entirely (aka protocols based on HTTP).  I'd
like to see this reframed.  I'd also like to see a little more text on
the "protocols based on HTTP" part.  At least to the point that the
reader is able to gain a better appreciation for how awful that choice
truly is.

Of course, that's just from a brief read.  Adopting the work is a good
way to get started on fixing those sorts of things.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 4:51 AM, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Folks, I'm going to open up a 2 week call for adoption period to see if the
> group has consensus for adopting work on a bis version of BCP56 (aka RFC
> 3205; On the use of HTTP as a Substrate).
> Mark introduced this work both on the general ART list and with a
> presentation at IETF 99.
> His draft, which is the subject of the adoption call, can be found
> https://mnot.github.io/I-D/bcp56bis/
> The ART discussion is archived here:
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/art/current/msg00303.html
> The presentation at IETF 99 is here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/99/materials/slides-99-httpbis-sessb-bcp56bis/
> (That's a pdf - trust your content-types!)
> The minutes from IETF 99 are here:
> https://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/minutes?item=minutes-99-httpbis-00.html
> Personally, I think this is an important document to update, and
> contemporaneous efforts like JMAP and DOH illustrate the relevancy.
> We'll leave the CfA open until October 27. I'm looking for arguments pro or
> con and especially expressions of interest in collaborating and reviewing
> the document. Thanks. Please weigh in.
> -Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 11 October 2017 21:50:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 18 November 2019 18:02:34 UTC