- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:36:26 +0200
- To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
- CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013-06-07 10:02, Eliot Lear wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I note that we still haven't cleaned up the connection model > sufficiently. When someone implements a specification they need to know > at least the port number to connect to. This is the document that has to > specify at least at a bare minimum how that happens. This can be > handled in at least one of four ways: > > 1. We refer to RFC-2616 normatively. This implies that we will not > obsolete 2616 at this time. If we do so later we would need to pull the > HTTP URI definition out and update the IANA definition. Hm, no. draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging is what's relevant (and should stay relevant). > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 08:36:57 UTC