- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:28:42 +1000
- To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
We've agreed to how we're proceeding after extensive discussion previously. Changing that plan would require re-chartering, and while I hear a few people agreeing with you, I hear a lot more people who are committed to the path we're on. So, extra words from you at this point aren't going to do it; I need to hear broad consensus among people who implement and deploy HTTP to even consider this. Thanks, On 16/07/2012, at 7:16 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <504E861E-C63B-466B-8E81-E6FC67DDDC7B@mnot.net>, Mark Nottingham w > rites: > > Mark, > > The goals you point to are however goals for a WG, and I think they > are good goals for a WG, but they are not goals for a protocol. > > Goals for a protocol would sound more like: > > * "90% of all first requests fit in one packet on 1500 byte MTU" > * "request-reponse model." / "peer-to-peer model" > * "All protocol elements must be fixed size or length prefixed." > * "Must have multiplexing and pipelining" > * "Cryptographic protection is included/optional/mandatory" > * "Has (no) out-of-protection routing envelope" > * "Can (not) mix protected and unprotected requests on same connection" > * "No-extra-RT upgrade from HTTP/1 to HTTP/2" > * "Must demonstrate 10Gbit/sec load-balancer implementation on COTS PC" > * "Client must offer unique device or user identifier" > * "Not allow cookies or other server initiated tagging of client." > * "Replace User-agent with something of finite size and preferably usable." > > and so on (examples only!) > > Picking what you call "a starting point" -- no matter which of the three > you pick -- will put many of these decisions outside the reach of the WG. > > Poul-Henning > > PS: Your argument that it's better to have SPDY inside pissing out > than outside pissing in, is just capitulation by a different name. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 09:29:10 UTC