- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:24:53 -0800
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: Working Group HTTP <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
My comment is that the feature identifiers for HTTP/1.1 should be http-1 (not http-11) and that applies to all instances of http-11 in the draft. The reason for this is because the HTTP major version is what defines the protocol in use, whereas the minor version is for capability negotiation within the protocol. Hence, all HTTP/1 clients and servers talk the same protocol even when they don’t support specific features of 1.1 (or 1.2, 1.3, …). That’s why, for example, the Host header field works fine for an HTTP/1.0 request. The same would be true if we ever needed minor versions of h2 or h3. Fixing this will also make the draft less ugly. ....Roy > On Nov 5, 2024, at 2:07 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Our AD has an outstanding DISCUSS on this document, due to HTTP-related concerns: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-http-client-server/ > > We'd like to spend a little time at the beginning of Thursday's meeting discussing this draft to get input from the broader HTTP community, so please take a few moments to skim through the draft beforehand. > > The draft specifies a configuration format for HTTP clients and servers. > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > >
Received on Thursday, 7 November 2024 03:25:10 UTC