- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 15:22:31 +1100
- To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
During BIS, we had an issue to move RFC2817 to Historic: https://trac.ietf.org/trac/httpbis/ticket/254 which we incorporated text for in -16: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-16 However, later on we addressed an earlier issue that Paul raised to make sure we updated 2817: https://trac.ietf.org/trac/httpbis/ticket/128 ... with the result that we moved from changing it to Historic to just Updating in -22: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-22 AIUI the reason for that issue was to assure that the attribution for the HTTPS URI Scheme was properly noted; however, the registry already references 7230 for that purpose. CONNECT is now completely defined in 7230 (and thus core-messaging). Is there any other reason to keep 2817 around? AIUI it isn't implemented by any browser, nor used anywhere, and isn't considered good practice any more. Am I forgetting something from that discussion? From https://www.ietf.org/blog/iesg-statement-designating-rfcs-historic/ -- > A document is labelled Historic when what it describes is no longer considered current: no longer recommended for use. If people still agree that Historic is the appropriate status, we can create a status-change document to kick that process off. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2019 04:22:58 UTC