W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2020

RFC7725bis new elements

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 22:29:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAHBU6it2o0BUkxi_J9qn22MjCrmkdaDzjwetTYm7v6VKkJBLQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
I'm unconvinced of the value of the proposed new.

Blocking Authority.
1. While it makes sense to identify the Blocking Entity with a URI -
presumably it has an online presence - the nature of the Blocking Authority
could be any of multiple levels of government or a trade association or the
operator of a building complex or almost any other imaginable entity. I
think that this is best described in textual human-readable form so as to
be actually useful to the party whose access is being blocked. 7725 already
provides a place to put this information and illustrates it with an
(admittedly whimsical) example.
2. I haven't seen much in the way of evidence to suggest that this would be
adopted if it were specified. Maybe I just missed it?

Geographical Scope of Block
1. I don't think country codes are going to do it, given that this could be
done at the regional or municipal level, or the scope might be expressed by
geofencing.
2. Same as before - what evidence do we have that this would be adopted
were it provided?
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2020 06:29:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 12 November 2020 06:29:36 UTC