Re: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 03 March 2016 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F419A1B3009 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:46:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Dc7j6MjE7aXl for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:46:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FD0A1B3008 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:46:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1abcsJ-0005MQ-Hb for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 23:41:43 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 23:41:43 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1abcsJ-0005MQ-Hb@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1abcsE-0005JF-A9 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 23:41:38 +0000
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net ([216.86.168.182]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1abcsA-0008CV-Q4 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 23:41:37 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [120.149.194.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D8D2A22E200; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 18:41:04 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <20160303131851.24634.26082.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:41:01 +1100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Mike Bishop <michael.bishop@microsoft.com>, HTTP WG <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, shares@ndzh.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9E63181E-ED10-4001-9DB9-891FC0868CC8@mnot.net>
References: <20160303131851.24634.26082.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.277, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1abcsA-0008CV-Q4 b11467753c8a352ae653ad744e2b2506
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/9E63181E-ED10-4001-9DB9-891FC0868CC8@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31172
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Hi Benoit,

> A clear sentence such as this one would have helped me:
> OLD:
>   This specification defines a new concept in HTTP, "Alternative
>   Services", that allows an origin server to nominate additional means
>   of interacting with it on the network.  
> NEW:
>   This specification defines a new concept in HTTP, "Alternative
>   Services", applicable to both HTTP 1.1 and HTTP 2.0, that allows 
>   an origin server to nominate additional means of interacting with 
>   it on the network.  

AltSvc is not specific to those two versions of the protocol; in theory, it could be used in HTTP/1.0, or in HTTP/3 if that eventuates.


> I overlooked this info in the following sentence, i.e. the fact that HTTP
> header = HTTP 1.1:
> 
>   It defines a general
>   framework for this in Section 2, along with specific mechanisms for
>   advertising their existence using HTTP header fields (Section 3) or
>   HTTP/2 frames (Section 4), plus a way to indicate that an alternative
>   service was used (Section 5).

The header isn't specific to HTTP/1.1; it could be used in HTTP/2 as well.

Cheers,


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