Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-new-status-02.txt

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Sun, 23 October 2011 04:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50DD221F8B0D for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 21:45:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.062
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.062 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.463, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E7QFqfMytYfB for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 21:45:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A93121F8593 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Oct 2011 21:45:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mnot-mini.mnot.net (unknown [118.209.71.208]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BABA622E1EB; Sun, 23 Oct 2011 00:44:52 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <4EA27687.1040800@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:44:49 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5676DF1A-5AB1-4CBD-88B9-242050235D3A@mnot.net>
References: <20111018234005.22724.87290.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <FEB7C839-4210-4CC9-BD1F-8A9C53790BD4@mnot.net> <4EA27687.1040800@gmx.de>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Cc: httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, Jan Algermissen <algermissen1971@me.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-nottingham-http-new-status-02.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 04:45:01 -0000

Thanks; updated on github.

On 22/10/2011, at 6:53 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2011-10-19 01:57, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> FYI. Some adjustment of the status codes in -01, and one new one (thanks to Jan for the idea).
>> ...
> 
> Looks good. Let's finish this.
> 
> One concern, one nit:
> 
> - it's suboptimal that we have an example of a Refresh header field with no spec for it (that could be worked around by making it a META tag in the response body)
> 
> - in appendix B, s/network filesystem access/remote authoring/.
> 
> Best regards, Julian

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/