- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:45:45 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012-07-25 09:53, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Next week in Vancouver, we'll discuss both the candidate proposals for HTTP/2.0 and whether we should re-charter to begin that work, confirming consensus on the list afterwards. > > Assuming we do choose one, we'll also need to discuss the charter itself. To facilitate that, I've pasted a straw-man of what such a charter might look like below. > > Please familiarise yourself with it. We can discuss on-list beforehand, of course, but please realise that we need to do this step-by-step, so don't get too far ahead of the conversation. > > Note -- this currently JUST covers the protocol discussion, not the authentication half; I've omitted it because there are a few different ways that work might end up, and it's going to need discussion before we can write even straw-man charter text. > > Cheers, > > ---8<--- > This Working Group is charged with maintaining and developing > the "core" specifications for HTTP. > > The Working Group's specification deliverables are: > * A document (or set of documents) that is suitable to supersede RFC 2616 as > the definition of HTTP/1.1 and move RFC 2817 to Historic status > * A document cataloguing the security properties of HTTP/1.1 If we are serious about that one, we'll need to restart work on it :-) > ... > The Working Group will prioritize HTTP/1.1 work until it is complete. +1000 > ... > Sep 2012 Working Group Last Call for HTTP Security Properties This one appears to be very optimistic. > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 09:46:20 UTC