W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: feedback on draft-nottingham-httpbis-alt-svc

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:00:08 +0000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWZ_n1-7wmy2WH4mAFUoPSrwsyETgkyiG-9CqeMwT9xhA@mail.gmail.com>
To: William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 6 March 2014 13:53, William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
> When we say we want to do this, does that mean we have to put in Section 3.6
> [1] too in the HTTP/2 spec or something normatively referenced?

As I understand it, we more or less agreed to the header field, the
frame and the not authoritative error/status code.  I don't think that
there was strong enough agreement regarding Section 3.6, but I'll let
Mark rule on that, maybe after some discussion.

I believe that the changes would touch a number of sections in the
draft, regardless of whether it's inlined or not.
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2014 14:00:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:24 UTC