- From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:17:36 -0400
- To: Jeffrey Schiller <jis@mit.edu>, IETF Transport Layer Security WG <ietf-tls@lists.consensus.com>
- Cc: Rohit Khare <rohit@ics.uci.edu>, "Http-Wg@Hplb. Hpl. Hp. Com" <http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
> From: Jeffrey Schiller [mailto:jis@mit.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 23:10 > To: IETF Transport Layer Security WG > Cc: Rohit Khare; Http-Wg@Hplb. Hpl. Hp. Com > Subject: Re: Last Call: Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1 to Proposed > Standard > > > Looks like we have an additional problem. The IANA comments: > > >draft-ietf-tls-http-upgrade-02.txt, and has the following comment > with > >regards to the publication of this document. > > > > In the "References" section, there are three works in progress: > > > > [3] "HTTP over TLS" > > [5] "WebDAV Advanced Collections Protocol" > > [8] "Tunneling TCP based protocols throught Web proxy > > servers" > > > > Current status? Are any of them normative? > > > > > >Joyce K. Reynolds > >IANA Liaison to the IESG > > [3] definitely appears to be normative. Can we get Eric's Document > advanced (This question is to the working group)? [3] documents existing practice for https [5] is noted because it defines an HTTP status code - we could remove it from this document and let them add an entry to the registry we are creating. [8] is an expired draft, referenced only because it was the original description - this document replaces it as far as standards track is concerned.
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 1999 06:24:21 UTC