Re: Giving the Framing Layer a real name

• From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
• Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 10:01:12 -0800
• To: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>
• Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <CABkgnnUWYR_scokR6DbBoFdD3ZqYF6gWqcis94tA9mHTD0o9cQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 27 February 2013 00:49, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com> wrote:
> My vote would be to nuke the layering and instead fold section 4 (the HTTP
> Layering) into the appropriate sections of the framing layer.  Trying to
> make these generic frames seems like a distraction, and it would be simpler
> for folks to read if these were just the basics of HTTP framing.

I said as much to mark in private: the framing layer is for HTTP.  A
name implies that it might stand alone.  That's not going to be true.
The work to make it true is not worthwhile either.

Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 18:01:40 UTC