From nobody Sat Mar 20 17:17:40 2021 Return-Path: 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 0FD6F3A0E9F for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 17:17:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.088 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.088 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yahoo.com 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 bHpZMeZMfLYq for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 17:17:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sonic314-14.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com (sonic314-14.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com [74.6.132.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24B663A0E9E for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2021 17:17:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1616285854; bh=BGnyZeYgHBkEqcWOKWTA16iKwIlDKpmm9jcd6+gJsCA=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject:Reply-To; b=QVVWMA504pCR5npSgAhkXUPZqwKYn8gKMmlHqMzrdbPKs2oNmtQj1oa6rAzaMoyR3PyUdQtYG4gvxHMBxplkgvxH2AKnTFX/i0zxdibtJSzx/mkCv0bXnydk1v5BDuj0NeRsSkhrjn3GrTrE56MJ6dqLHtc8NxIRlyK9CV7jEa0gLjHnYNnpkLOe7RT95L3KJO3MqVWu7n+uFbiUl9sZYhbW07uC6tKyKEjHd1WCbvVMrcDzSwL18SWO7uwJxL4CTY1p9fZ8ZE8DeI2r4+U3MyibcMABtRRhy4mp3cktiy4GKmEGYbnUvttjp/XHzDqxB6p4ZVNhuS33fpWS/uS+vA== X-SONIC-DKIM-SIGN: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1616285854; bh=JomLvma/Z8H+sxSsL5MGgBAmZyaEgbeeXNtE5v1tjLw=; h=X-Sonic-MF:Date:From:To:Subject:From:Subject; b=XUwFBiEMKeNeqbbZNwfvcaNOTqeQjoPlp4w4Mj8BlrdT3/OVMBYJEyxuejUyrODRIBnicOsyou1v3lBVuouY1K4UpKPIbpoEYNVYwRZIiCqEfACi/Sqr8tJh/bLXO14TeMKBeLmhrrPQRIp59JRkLckkIZilLfaYmQrLH//aSREjPUDqBb3f6f+UMefpi2gWgoMitSObOiugeQadFU8CZfFvjmYhwa3eSwYJ9wvv7gOcXoOXNxJtlO1lzA652XIv//xISbp5axgLdVlQ0PPPl7BAFUyVM7UtgTLtQoj+hYqAqm+Z26b8lTWV5wDNXtQxt+s894qJ/oSybOLBl3BeVA== X-YMail-OSG: B.Xe584VM1kxebeSvqilrE.rBOfjIilEC6lGDdzlYCJyO12UoXIqdymKATE0z.K eUlqSXzXMIjTk7.l_LHCb153PAdroac.3GtymjvQwRGd0ZMSy2k7OQM3obZ3ChlSawN5FegXdq76 TAFB5jpJi3NCvuyrQIvvIRzZyEhZrJLjINYJkeHbcMIK3gZmI78b3WMcuxvCcjHDeFEBloLhZc_X NaGtLaj8AzHtH10HpQbRxHSCtJIw88Le5MvLZanLLjT.Cb8.PxvTCDp26J55UmcKQW5bmrqGt.GJ uXHV6hMuuW3pxJFaxSd4P192a6w6e9LT.riST6S8x2NfK2i_SntMrrfwxiSRzWjiKKd.AYmQFH7B IiB0ouTcJeTTvq5M6yO3umLmoHUP.Vhfy3sCqNWmvIYoqV1taVLAs.Kjl5XIstns2sRuYC_ypE5n FkB3rnlOucQCTRI6tuL83xU7d.Kqvt7FWZLAxLEDyIAH.1BYjeSYQT2gRjc1V1P9eeWqWB2JPc.b V8erucJtC6o2Hfcpyl0UazzW77kMrO5J9khNgMz4_L0ZsXPAMwM5LP3XT_RdsLuJwq6kdleqbyN7 bOetRlKe3WqdhfDpNw5L5QXOuBtQxhwxirtwuWGm9rD8J2uiXTGaOxGPqMf7JQJRTQjuIsQEhXFP KuIAVhtHqcGirApm7w2y1IcCaChsEohD2R1f_Xpa4goSRjpL99avLI9u_emV42GAC2S2mA9aVTDK 4TTbzguS3AFeMce2vR_bEsw5J9AIakDh.eO44feQJDXM8sm5OH7pTBsBfl_E0R0U_o_tU4ZR04FM VzGLMRRKtg0w2tXrFolVOqtrL5hwUy58boDj_QGrA5XDM6qvTf4Zd54sTLsdlKAIpgnVUFnDUuVh YiQrFPCWPIQewePm1.qvGawQkB6JKRoVXMSTQ3vCujX9woU2oVGCv278LLRq0pVKMRnQktGDlx_g SJjzgUBsDATuvYs5253mb_oJ4E0LcEJBTNGE49GoJYu23Lv5yqlZHDIq_X95pGyAPWAlfjYNuPxH xUxOVaLVEdvjUnKODH7sFp3GMip79W6aZMhsTsA5rxcSLuFfmng5MqVwIcogAFw3hYGVFT5VyXCw Pusa4Bax9u02qUQkB.Z4wedD3uGG9yIsoFmE6XHWPhcX5.Hw6JnaA907KxeLtck3shzzMnCZSANY 2th2yMhczb9ijdDaybOT67OgziOjtY5KRiujJ3cQw21tbUYy7TmO0gx5KNe6bpZluPwEjaTlwCCP aABi2p.mVRPREEBOh49VrXpapKAL_ZYDfOC1LV82hTzrHSg384oREm4hMeYGw.KHvTpkzh6VYdTK XX4ixQI1Bz7FJ.tO7CDQI6dq.xwwQk1OjDLexLWCMww2I9CaQQX1jsSq0oCw3RhkLx2SE5jhbHbG B8HBdz7fBPHqwbpI8CDUSY59glvLNyHA1xEZlZy09Pj3Cp7lagqevodimO392LHrVBFP.6vPLSDg rRMZTm1IGm8XG9zKnNWfnYItqom3vApFLTx_kt465bPsxTgHXcrquE4HaRJNNpEmpRGEpguDP87x 4z9X0_ioIrzC8a.nU.Z4dcP3xj.g9Tfi6NPOIyI5HamC.efeALefcS39iEDO67seONHD8zgz.d_C KRLoD41z6y5_rM4cyaARDftTq3YwP0qfFKINO7EpHfSYf03XFjRLbJ3y1U_a9W8hXFEvppxPTLYv _6L.bAiazcadQGMmVp88BnwIIcSr9ywz7y4NhhUN6gxf36eHGGGg.dlmUMZ4g6r_j2crKnJTNfNo RS1bxNmtqw76LVekzWHFUtlbOeXnJvfl49ImnLpD_GCUv0Zwqua_cPKRRauK3hOAPfMwaXa1gOwP 5Wq0XqN4F71qQJ3WDdASpuAJHaGhLsBu8RY231XVMFQUrAnVdnrwqLAN7SikUbmeXOJsVbk0oFz_ TeVz7LF1.qW6X_VcjkeT7pBblMs8ZrDoTJWVXKq5LW6o3r0yDEiHUr80aJW4bemyshQPQWNCJQ1y euU3TKRMvcgL9lKusNb4jPl2j0WhwLhM1NMwDFn7tlOOcXfIl7.vnEYfRqEYloC587Mj1gtDrrjL CD1Om.dcA.0NMuYNkdjuGJBu6D2Etj5DSYY9Gkbpj20x5K4zWs4G2GtnfjDCEBAB.ToYG8rdhFcD CfDjfuvJIKWoPgnnZ3BZI5H0Z3.XP_Fe4Gq99AXFTLJ67RdCioAkv1Cm__AXGOG1BIADM6xxNo6g NBTdJfe7tKPg62z092H9nHwU.LuKZ03Nl5WOlPts1woS.4gQRsQYKw8KWJsCQienPfwOWLmkbIG. GEMhVCyP22kAqASqpr3GdR30c8potliznz2QXkAWljaSG1DwS9ASYtYpj3Q6YgOnjnXquVjNMSEk wfvezW7wicnGAmPCdD02.rjEE3VmghepJfFhMdTe9z4Titai3G8xfQxbAZeVrHGXP2XYrXMHAZdp 8_xU9otwpGWRGAkKJ4tySRFyMbWCzZK.p7t.tcFuqSCsEGjxbniOPIEUWG9kKw_S58uDtZglnFVf ztcGL77GZNue44i3SD3IlfopEQOt6RHb2p78XAUvbkczB7IuOViFIbm1suRBTE1Lg87jQyrSzyCe Gt6auIVR95P_YfcaOJSuLbqu04Jg2s4fw0RwGIj2T3sTwt6Un_.0i50ev0GNoaZZR9BxrWeAXUne BQWiD1Kdk4B3NS7CxIhdJ2dStw9ITwV7SkgXK_wI4RVc.jj6h0zzUU9SppRZU7tP67vBd7DAv0Ta yZwN8ZrtG1pdep9u5eYIQcK__44cvwQ8T8BstXIeEfQY11TCA5uAjFhcr1iXHshKAyEGa1.OJe5S L7Ow8xBpjVnXJkzD4qEd7sr1tDn3ryXcW12P_n0dTgjPSGGS6q8NzGvtTNnevKelk1BS0X9dNUpl ytU5_YbItXet2QY4SYyKHCjpI8bhuLjJxU8tbSYqcZhA_ X-Sonic-MF: Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic314.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Sun, 21 Mar 2021 00:17:34 +0000 Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 00:17:24 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Amundsen Reply-To: Mike Amundsen To: "lars.svensson@web.de" , "Kirsty.p@ncsc.gov.uk" , "dispatch@ietf.org" , Darrel Miller Cc: "Ruben Verborgh (UGent-imec)" , "httpapi@ietf.org" , "hvdsomp@gmail.com" Message-ID: <1711449802.2238336.1616285844270@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2238335_508862020.1616285844268" X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.17936 YMailNorrin Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/89.0.4389.90 Safari/537.36 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [httpapi] [dispatch] HTTP profile negotiation -- implementation evidence (was: HTTP profile negotiation - httpapi?) X-BeenThere: httpapi@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Building Blocks for HTTP APIs List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 00:17:40 -0000 ------=_Part_2238335_508862020.1616285844268 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The ability to negotiate profiles has been an underlying assumption for the= ALPS[1] media type -- now ten years on. I think there are a number=C2=A0valuable=C2=A0use cases for this idea and I= 'd be happy to see it find a home in the HTTPAPI working group. No matter where it ends up, I support it and would be happy to help it alon= g. [1]=C2=A0draft-amundsen-richardson-foster-alps-06 - Application-Level Profi= le Semantics (ALPS) |=20 |=20 | |=20 draft-amundsen-richardson-foster-alps-06 - Application-Level Profile Sem... Application-Level Profile Semantics (ALPS) (Internet-Draft, 2021) | | | MCA Mike Amundsen=20 mamund@yahoo.com=20 On Saturday, March 20, 2021, 05:43:59 PM EDT, Darrel Miller wrote: =20 =20 #yiv0976507746 P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}First off, as a co-chair o= f the HTTPAPI working group, apologies for not being present in the dispatc= h meeting. Speaking as an individual, my concern with this proposal is that while I do= understand the value that this proposal brings, my experience is that the = vast majority of API practitioners do not care.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Trying to sell = the value of self-descriptive HTTP responses has mostly fallen on deaf ears= for the last 15 years, and I don't see anything that is changing that sent= iment.=C2=A0=C2=A0 The notion of using profile to further qualify a media type is something th= at a number of people in the industry have tried to promote for years and i= t has gained very little traction.=C2=A0 I don't believe standardization of= negotiation and discovery will change that. Fundamentally, most API practitioners don't see the negative system impact = of coupling a resource identifier with response semantics.=C2=A0 When they = call GET /customer=C2=A0 and they get application/json back they don't see = a problem with assuming the properties of that payload contain customer inf= ormation.=C2=A0 Sure, it violates REST's self-descriptive constraint, but t= ry convincing an API developer to care.=C2=A0 I spent many years trying uns= uccessfully.=C2=A0 The popularity of API description formats is evidence th= at devs don't care about the coupling introduced by connecting response sem= antics with resource identifiers. In the dispatch meeting, the assertion was made that profiles enable versio= ning.=C2=A0 But so does changing the resource identifier, which is the comm= on practice today.=C2=A0I have zero technical objections to the principles = presented in the RFC, in fact I support them.=C2=A0 But I strongly believe = that history has demonstrated that they will not get mainstream adoption an= d hence I am reluctant to support the httpapi working group spending time o= n the standardization effort.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Perhaps I am wrong to think that success of adoption should be a criterion = for standardization.=C2=A0 Maybe if some segment of the community will bene= fit, then that meets the bar.=C2=A0 I'm fairly new to the process of WGs so= I am open to guidance here. Thanks, Darrel --=20 httpapi mailing list httpapi@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpapi =20 ------=_Part_2238335_508862020.1616285844268 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The ability to negotiate profiles has been an u= nderlying assumption for the ALPS[1] media type -- now ten years on.
I think there are a number valuable use cases for th= is idea and I'd be happy to see it find a home in the HTTPAPI working group= .

No matter where it ends up, I support it and wou= ld be happy to help it along.






MCA
Mike Amundsen
mamund@yahoo.com
=


=20
=20
On Saturday, March 20, 2021, 05:43:59 PM EDT, Darrel Mi= ller <darrel.miller=3D40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:


First off, as a co-chair of the HTTPAPI working group, apologies for not be= ing present in the dispatch meeting.

Speaking as an individual, my concern with this p= roposal is that while I do understand the value that this proposal brings, = my experience is that the vast majority of API practitioners do not care.   Trying to sell the = value of self-descriptive HTTP responses has mostly fallen on deaf ears for= the last 15 years, and I don't see anything that is changing that sentimen= t.  

The notion of using profile to further qualify a = media type is something that a number of people in the industry have tried = to promote for years and it has gained very little traction.  I don't believe standardization of nego= tiation and discovery will change that.

Fundamentally, most API practitioners don't see t= he negative system impact of coupling a resource identifier with response s= emantics.  When they call GET /customer  and they get application/json back they don't see a proble= m with assuming the properties of that payload contain customer information= .  Sure, it violates REST's self-descriptive constraint, but try convi= ncing an API developer to care.  I spent many years trying unsuccessfully.  The popularity of API description forma= ts is evidence that devs don't care about the coupling introduced by connec= ting response semantics with resource identifiers.

In the dispatch meeting, the assertion was made t= hat profiles enable versioning.  But so does changing the resource ide= ntifier, which is the common practice today.
 
I have zero technical objections to the principle= s presented in the RFC, in fact I support them.  But I strongly believ= e that history has demonstrated that they will not get mainstream adoption and hence I am reluctant to support = the httpapi working group spending time on the standardization effort. = ; 

Perhaps I am wrong to think that success of adopt= ion should be a criterion for standardization.  Maybe if some segment = of the community will benefit, then that meets the bar.  I'm fairly new to the process of WGs so I am ope= n to guidance here.

Thanks,

Darrel


------=_Part_2238335_508862020.1616285844268--