Re: IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic [#254]

Works for me.


On 03/08/2011, at 9:35 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2011-06-29 05:39, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> FYI. Our drafts state that they will obsolete 2145 and 2616, so we need to decide if we want to explicitly move them to Historic. We also have ticket #254, "move RFC 2817 to Historic status"<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/254>, so I'll add these to that ticket.
>> 
>> Cheers,
> 
> OK, proposed patch: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/254/254.diff>
> 
> ...which will turn the Abstract for P1 to:
> 
> Abstract
> 
>   The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level
>   protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypertext information
>   systems.  HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global
>   information initiative since 1990.  This document is Part 1 of the
>   seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as
>   "HTTP/1.1" and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616 and moves it to
>   historic status, along with its predecessor RFC 2068.
> 
>   Part 1 provides an overview of HTTP and its associated terminology,
>   defines the "http" and "https" Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)
>   schemes, defines the generic message syntax and parsing requirements
>   for HTTP message frames, and describes general security concerns for
>   implementations.
> 
>   This part also obsoletes RFCs 2145 (on HTTP version numbers) and 2817
>   (on using CONNECT for TLS upgrades) and moves them to historic
>   status.
> 
> Best regards, Julian

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 20:41:24 UTC