IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis

Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM> Fri, 08 June 2007 18:43 UTC

Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HwjQX-0000DS-Dx; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:43:13 -0400
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HwjQV-0000CP-PD for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:43:11 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HwjQV-0000AP-EN for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:43:11 -0400
Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HwjQH-00077b-Rz for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:43:11 -0400
Received: from fe-amer-06.sun.com ([192.18.108.180]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l58IgvGW017674 for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 18:42:57 GMT
Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JJB00001XZ8XT00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Chris.Newman@Sun.COM) for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 12:42:57 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from [10.1.110.5] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJB00KFLYNIM520@mail-amer.sun.com>; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 12:42:56 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:42:54 -0700
From: Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis
In-reply-to: <p06240871c28dd59e7371@[10.20.30.108]>
To: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
Message-id: <DF22FF4432D38C2347668153@[10.1.110.5]>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Mac OS X)
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline
References: <BA772834-227A-4C1B-9534-070C50DF05B3@mnot.net> <392C98BA-E7B8-44ED-964B-82FC48162924@mnot.net> <6AE049B9045C00064222693F@[10.1.110.5]> <p06240871c28dd59e7371@[10.20.30.108]>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2
Cc:
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols <discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org

Paul Hoffman wrote on 6/7/07 8:44 -0700:
>> Beyond that I consider it inappropriate to hold publication of a
>> useful revision hostage to new security engineering work.  That
>> opinion may not be shared by others on the IESG.
>
> Knowing ahead of time whether or not the work of this proposed WG is likely
> to get smacked down at the end by the IESG would greatly affect the people
> working on HTTPbis.

Agreed.  The mechanism to get the knowledge in advance is to be specific in the 
charter about what will and what won't be done.

                - Chris

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email