Re: HTTP over Delay-Tolerant Networks

> Le 31 mars 2023 à 12:09, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> a écrit :
> 
> 
> Perhaps section 3 could be expanded significantly to identify HTTP features that should be considered for such usage?  E.g 100-Continues , compression (if done better by the low levels as suggested in this thread), http2 push etc.

Ok. I might need help here, as I might not think on all the “special cases” that need to be discussed.

> 
> Also would be nice if the HTTP/1.1 example in section 4 was a legal request (no host header).

Ok. 

Thanks for reading and providing improvement suggestions.

Marc.

> 
> cheers
> 
> 
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 at 10:21, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net <mailto:mnot@mnot.net>> wrote:
>> HTTP folks,
>> 
>> Marc Blanchet (CC:ed) has a draft which we should be aware of:
>>  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-blanchet-dtn-http-over-bp/
>> 
>> In a nutshell, this is a mapping of HTTP semantics onto the "bundle protocol" as an alternative transport protocol. Bundle is designed for operation in high-delay networks (hence the WG name, Delay Tolerant Networks) such as space.
>> 
>> Because of the types of organisations that do procurement for things like space travel, this is likely to need to be standards-track.
>> 
>> (Marc, anything to add?)
>> 
>> From a HTTP WG perspective, we should come to agreement about how involved we want to be in this work. At a minimum, we'll do at least one HTTPDIR review. Do people feel more is needed -- e.g., closer coordination after this is adopted by DTN?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> --
>> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com <mailto:gregw@webtide.com>> CTO http://webtide.com <http://webtide.com/>