- From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 11:10:00 +0200
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Julian, Right you are. So... propose some text? Eliot On 6/7/13 10:36 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > 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 09:10:36 UTC