W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2019

Moving 2817 to Historic

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 15:22:31 +1100
Message-Id: <DCF165C7-1403-45BF-85E6-A546E8365B4C@mnot.net>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
During BIS, we had an issue to move RFC2817 to Historic:
  https://trac.ietf.org/trac/httpbis/ticket/254
which we incorporated text for in -16:
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-16

However, later on we addressed an earlier issue that Paul raised to make sure we updated 2817:
  https://trac.ietf.org/trac/httpbis/ticket/128
... with the result that we moved from changing it to Historic to just Updating in -22:
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-22

AIUI the reason for that issue was to assure that the attribution for the HTTPS URI Scheme was properly noted; however, the registry already references 7230 for that purpose. CONNECT is now completely defined in 7230 (and thus core-messaging).

Is there any other reason to keep 2817 around? AIUI it isn't implemented by any browser, nor used anywhere, and isn't considered good practice any more. Am I forgetting something from that discussion?

From https://www.ietf.org/blog/iesg-statement-designating-rfcs-historic/ -- 

> A document is labelled Historic when what it describes is no longer considered current: no longer recommended for use. 

If people still agree that Historic is the appropriate status, we can create a status-change document to kick that process off.

Cheers,




--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2019 04:22:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 13 February 2019 04:23:00 UTC