IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] [Fwd: Gen-ART LC review of draft-loreto-http-bidirectional-05.txt]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 04 January 2011 03:29 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C993A69B4 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 19:29:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.426
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.173, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k8-LJD4w4cHW for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 19:29:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qy0-f170.google.com (mail-qy0-f170.google.com [209.85.216.170]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B073A69B3 for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 19:29:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by qyk10 with SMTP id 10so15050115qyk.1 for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 19:31:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V6sch7AK6an5ooCdeFiRKzWoh4fq/teVzM7SS392OvQ=; b=WuZcFRENGyk05Qv3x9uSr77+a7/OEvgxQwML6N6hQ4x2+blqOGn3LaGpnf8Ay+IaKx iyYgwU+TX77qIL/cDBjsG18eWpHgf5hIynyC01CfLQdFtVzBJHyTcI8QL8PLQzl17YBT F+Asdbf/JQNanzJqsONOq9AXsIvOjizCW9lTE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=BYbLOGXF0QOHQO/CKtqv5PFhvjGNaQ8x6mJNd4cV6lppZxJH7vEA/ypyXmUMuXVVsc BAsRT/42h5eOOvK5cALdF1TYOJGGN2Tcfh6a41Tz0eiNbCj0ezn7/VbdSkNtEhl0727z VroZZshH9JvWN3fj14MqgAtcqhR3MZckMwPqE=
Received: by 10.229.225.17 with SMTP id iq17mr6416080qcb.288.1294111874445; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 19:31:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.1.1.4] ([121.98.190.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l12sm12490094qcu.31.2011.01.03.19.31.11 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 03 Jan 2011 19:31:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D22947B.3000506@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 16:31:07 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
References: <4CF9B9EC.20409@gmail.com> <4D225726.4080005@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <4D225726.4080005@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Discuss Apps <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [Fwd: Gen-ART LC review of draft-loreto-http-bidirectional-05.txt]
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 03:29:09 -0000

It's OK for me, but at this point it's really the IESG's
opinion that matters.

Thanks
   Brian Carpenter

On 2011-01-04 12:09, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> To close the loop on-list, the authors have added the following
> paragraph to the introduction:
> 
>    The authors acknowledge that both the "HTTP long polling" and "HTTP
>    streaming" mechanisms stretch the original semantic of HTTP and that
>    the HTTP protocol was not designed for bidirectional communication.
>    This document neither encourages nor discourages the use of these
>    mechanisms, and takes no position on whether they provide appropriate
>    solutions to the problem of providing bidirectional communication
>    between clients and servers.  Instead, this document merely
>    identifies technical issues with these mechanisms and suggests best
>    practices for their deployment.
> 
> That's not quite what we have in version -06, but we'll submit -07 soon
> if Brian doesn't object to that text.
> 
> Peter
> 
> On 12/3/10 8:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> I thought I should forward my Gen-ART review here, since it
>> contains an opinion statement. See attachment.
>>
>>    Brian
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-loreto-http-bidirectional-05.txt
>> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 16:44:06 +1300
>> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
>> Organization: University of Auckland
>> To: draft-loreto-http-bidirectional.all@tools.ietf.org,  General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
>>
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email