- From: Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 05:45:15 -0700
- To: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Benjamin Schwartz <ietf@bemasc.net>, David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com>
I support adoption of this document on the basis of providing a TCP equivalent option for what’s specified in RFC9298. Best, Chris > On May 10, 2023, at 4:57 PM, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com> wrote: > > Hello all, > > To bubble this up in people’s email inboxes — does anyone else in the WG have an opinion on adopting this document or not? > > Best, > Tommy > >> On Apr 17, 2023, at 2:08 PM, David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I support adoption. >> David >> >> On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 8:15 PM Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> This email starts a call for adoption on draft-schwartz-httpbis-connect-tcp (https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schwartz-httpbis-connect-tcp-01.html). As discussed at IETF 116, this document defines a mechanism to use extended CONNECT (which supports paths and URI templates) for proxying TCP, akin to the UDP proxying support in RFC 9298. This does not deprecate the original use of CONNECT for TCP proxying. >> >> Please reply to this email to indicate if you support adopting this document in this working group. >> >> The call will last for 2 weeks, and end on Monday, May 1. >> >> Best, >> Tommy >
Received on Thursday, 11 May 2023 12:45:25 UTC