[httpapi] Clarification on 'Sunset' header

Evert Pot <me@evertpot.com> Sat, 19 December 2020 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <me@evertpot.com>
X-Original-To: httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18C463A0EA7 for <httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 11:30:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=evertpot.com header.b=H2eIRnLq; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=AfiwxRKt
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 4SMn7opURzYG for <httpapi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 11:30:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 004153A0E9D for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 11:30:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 274335C00FD for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 14:30:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 19 Dec 2020 14:30:17 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=evertpot.com; h= to:from:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=mesmtp; bh=N7niaHFFDGYRYsaHazH+ues Ukgr6oBmDN6+bJ5bDP7g=; b=H2eIRnLqmO8g+0sbzIm7TlGiPam9X6fo2VbdVNi 18L8cA5SoZynegwdo4UtQ9KACuHpr3PmbXlWAcCXISy9kASCpwvRhzBe5yBdgzyX 6nfX99cov2DGJmbupkITniNgSDTXt8SSdA6Bwg/bem7DDB1g0bxVmcTN9aieWGAe hMRk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=N7niaH FFDGYRYsaHazH+uesUkgr6oBmDN6+bJ5bDP7g=; b=AfiwxRKtdZqcz4y26Tci8M 9OT3SgYnjY6caZqLlZXa/I6HUUfoGJTHHbx0rGHQS89YxTtS3F7RDuGVvukYVuvm 9DaAyKerm3NzL1wah6VVAubo6n5qszyyRfCJzAZIwFlQXheEAm2J1z8LXYXGNv6Z 3Cz3QZQU/P+gBDnRmCKGv9OIuK/chV5jbYzZD5HCn8xMtJTPvkrHJDRzZ2qz4Dbh i6D9gYHIIiRLQnfM0S4bd+GJRbKZJYEtEI5IvVJAcs3bQlg9aS6Vn4QhOL8yJWZ0 oXZQg/D/ZL4/TQtIuGZ6GGmHl57Aqopwym+1wvge6REfTP0skqtFC4IKylWKl+6g ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:yFTeX5NAdzHZ_OHPZTrz4VB8AqzQbLsEREg5-fgviWcAacDWdIKtoQ> <xme:yFTeX7-sRH1uCMbU0XIC-9XrUU7usuoKpATI9RXwCtf2kMkQs_nJXRaLChoTn8dCG hezwht7vam2Emb8>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudelkedguddvlecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepvffhuffkffgfgggtgfesthekre dttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepgfhvvghrthcurfhothcuoehmvgesvghvvghrthhpohhtrdgt ohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtvdelhefhlefhteeifeejheegudefledtvedute eljeeuveekjeeuudffvdelleenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivght fhdrohhrghenucfkphepudegvddruddviedrudeifedrjedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhgvsegvvhgvrhhtphhothdrtgho mh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:yFTeX4R_5eIXrv0a7fH8tNkJV1SYTgqdsZ-NDr_JjNSTuqNmM6qDEg> <xmx:yFTeX1tP2xb3Cue58AbeBioA5Dcp42SMzov0Kirp5IwwzGHbFcsQGQ> <xmx:yFTeXxdQ1BJ3BTlSdrfsqbglg98ohy9vEcUNkIh85jYyXZEU-2E4Rg> <xmx:yVTeX7oKCqAV8iD-ugNXB8MtYwVhKG9TrKnC97nIrpJSOI7plU18gA>
Received: from [192.168.2.61] (unknown [142.126.163.70]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 986B9240057 for <httpapi@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 14:30:16 -0500 (EST)
To: "httpapi@ietf.org" <httpapi@ietf.org>
From: Evert Pot <me@evertpot.com>
Message-ID: <1756e3ce-f56a-8da4-31bf-8836c9ef2258@evertpot.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 14:30:14 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/httpapi/2SKI8Fv1mFKKsZb4u1CrsuH-k24>
Subject: [httpapi] Clarification on 'Sunset' header
X-BeenThere: httpapi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Building Blocks for HTTP APIs <httpapi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/httpapi>, <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/httpapi/>
List-Post: <mailto:httpapi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpapi>, <mailto:httpapi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 19:30:20 -0000

Hi everyone,

We are adopting the Deprecation header and link relation in our tools:

https://github.com/badgateway/ketting
https://github.com/curveball/browser

We already had some support for the 'deprecated' status from 
link-hints[1], so this addition makes a lot of sense. 'Ketting' will 
emit console warnings when hitting things that are deprecated, and the 
'Curveball hypermedia browser' renders links, but will use a special 
treatment for links with the 'deprecation' relation type.

I have a question about the 'Sunset' header though. The draft states:

 >  In addition to the deprecation related information, if the resource
 > provider wants to convey to the client application that the
 > deprecated resource is expected to become unresponsive at a specific
 > point in time, the Sunset HTTP header field [RFC8594] can be used in
 > addition to the "Deprecation" header

To me, a resource conveying when they will eventually become 
unresponsive is not *necessarily* worthy of warning. Perhaps, the intent 
of a resource is to just live a limited time.

So, I wonder if it's useful to define Sunset not as a warning (you need 
to upgrade) or additive to Deprecation. Could Sunset be used if I want 
to just convey: this resource is only available until then. Perhaps my 
API will let you download reports for exactly 30 days after creation, so 
I'd wanna inform users, but this is not a deprecation.

Question: has the structured headers[2] syntax been considered for the 
Deprecation header? ('?1' instead of 'true')

Evert

[1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-link-hint
[2]: 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-19#section-4.1.9