W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-12.txt

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:38:50 +0100
Message-ID: <54E3608A.8090605@gmx.de>
To: mnot@mnot.net, draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression.all@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, barryleiba@computer.org
On 2015-02-17 15:55, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> A new version (-12) has been submitted for draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-12.txt
> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression/
> Diff from previous version:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-12
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> IETF Secretariat.

So this now says:

>    The static table was created from the most frequent header fields
>    used by popular web sites, with the addition of HTTP/2-specific
>    pseudo-header fields (see Section of [HTTP2]).  For header
>    fields with a few frequent values, an entry was added for each of
>    these frequent values.  For other header fields, an entry was added
>    with an empty value.

Is that really true? How did Proxy-Auth* end up in the table then?

It also leaves the reader to wonder why we did not remove header fields 
that can not appear in HTTP/2.

I still believe we should actually *fix* the table.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2015 15:39:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:43 UTC