IETF Logo Mail Archive

[CDNi] Protocol names in draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-19 and draft-ietf-cdni-metadata

Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> Fri, 20 May 2016 14:00 UTC

Return-Path: <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
X-Original-To: cdni@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cdni@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D628812D13A for <cdni@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 May 2016 07:00:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=ltBHt8FS; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=QD8rRo4A
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6qEEDrIgGUGR for <cdni@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 May 2016 07:00:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B03E312D0B9 for <cdni@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 May 2016 07:00:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D2B20B1E for <cdni@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 May 2016 10:00:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 20 May 2016 10:00:43 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=tqb rw68ayHufdwSTdMiscJCkhOw=; b=ltBHt8FSzEhZG3fPyGhy90bDh+UBTKOfDUG 2bb7+RgeRS+Y9IJk4gvadzlsFdCpGp543ejGQpHKXTp7r2CFarnnQuojCfxL09Ka GplCg/ZDmo0/u3xjNcXtVuiasbwYMmZadC1osAVmmn53Wd3XU/sFV5ytr73UdZdc HFc4AzV4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=tqbrw68ayHufdwSTdMiscJCkhOw=; b=QD8rR o4AvDwf2OjdjAMzb6OUc/hCem1kaHHbUED3vgqKrZSSA/zFo/OyO1mAjoh3eRgr7 PFp8qdm+F/YvtU6w7JiCWlf8HOefbWplCsAgsgQWzLcs2P2BwWkwBidcsUAL1hiw RSmJTAVa5pTYbFW+Jagnkgs6bleao0QCqA75Fs=
Received: by web5.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id E5C37A644A5; Fri, 20 May 2016 10:00:42 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1463752842.3957746.613766209.00113288@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: FxOzj+Y3b8TA4MNAl7134A+3/xsPO9N3i2mUrOoMxCVi 1463752842
From: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
To: cdni@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-37b57599
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 15:00:42 +0100
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cdni/diFNbhyo03fsg5Rgvag-CoawFSs>
Subject: [CDNi] Protocol names in draft-ietf-cdni-footprint-capabilities-semantics-19 and draft-ietf-cdni-metadata
X-BeenThere: cdni@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is to discuss issues associated with the Interconnection of Content Delivery Networks \(CDNs\)" <cdni.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cdni>, <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cdni/>
List-Post: <mailto:cdni@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni>, <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 14:00:45 -0000

Hi,
This is a minor point, but I am wondering if it is better to change
protocol names from "http1.1" and "https1.1" to "http/1.1" and
"https/1.1" in both documents? I think consistency with how http is
referenced elsewhere (e.g. the version number in HTTP itself) would be a
plus.

Thoughts?

Best Regards,
Alexey

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email