- From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:27:06 -0400
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Sign me up Tim From my high tech gadget > On Aug 16, 2016, at 21:18, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > >> On 4 Aug 2016, at 1:08 AM, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >> Alternative Approaches are always welcome. >> >> As an aside, I thought draft-shane was very interesting - thanks for mentioning it here. >> >> Here's what I have heard as "requirements" around dns in http in the past: >> >> * a standard application developer api for lookup. Often expressed as REST/JSON >> * a standard application developer api for publishing changes. Often expressed as REST/JSON >> * a tunnel for the DNS protocol >> * a push mechanism for broadcasting DNS info relevant to the http connection >> * solid integration with HTTP caches >> >> I know there have been a number of json-ification discussions in the past. Maybe its time to roll those, the DNS expertise, and the HTTP expertise into a unified effort? It seems this is an easy space to accidentally partition out to its own domain experts and end up with something that isn't satisfying to the whole. I would hope to avoid that. Tim, what are your thoughts on that? >> >> Doing that is certainly a more ambitious project than just tunneling an existing protocol, but I think its potential impact is much bigger - especially if it gets the right people in the room. >> >> In addition to the differing sets of requirements, I think there are different perspectives on eco-system and security impacts to be had. > > +1 to that. Who'd be interested in a side meeting (Bar BoF, separate session, whatever) in Seoul? > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >
Received on Wednesday, 17 August 2016 01:27:36 UTC