IANA Registration Requirements for Status Codes and Method Names

• From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
• Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 12:26:12 +0200
• To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <4A264FC4.7090408@gmx.de>

Hi,

in Part 2 we currently state for both:

"Any document registering new method names should be traceable through 
statuses of either 'Obsoletes' or 'Updates' to this document."

I think we inherited that from RFC2817, Section 7.1. 
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2817#section-7.1>)

IMHO this doesn't make sense; the "updates" relation shouldn't be used 
just because a specification uses a well-defined extension point that 
already has a registry.

Proposal: remove the requirement from sections 2.1 (method names) and 
4.1 (status codes).

BR, Julian

Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 10:26:53 UTC