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

Re: [451] #80: Distinguishing intermediaries from origins

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 19:11:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHBU6iu39yKJP2sCoOxjoJgpqi5ffugjq1xq7Hay1rRixQKNVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Sounds like a winner to me.  I’ll do another draft.

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
wrote:

> --------
> In message <818CC92A-A4B9-496A-8ACE-23F0DFC5BDDD@mnot.net>, Mark
> Nottingham wri
> tes:
>
> >>> Before we get to that, though =E2=80=94 is there a compelling reason
> not
> >>> to use the Link header for this?
> >>
> >> The Link header could theoretically be used to point to non-blocked
> versions
> >> of the content, but I don't think that schenario is likely.
> >
> >That's not what I meant.
>
> I know.  You asked for compelling reasons *not* to use Link and I
> gave you the most (but not very) compelling reason not to do so. :-)
>
> I fully agree, we should just use Link for the 451 reason/authority URI
>
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>



-- 
- Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see
https://keybase.io/timbray)
Received on Tuesday, 1 September 2015 02:11:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:46 UTC