port #?

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 07 June 2013 08:05 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8053B21F962B for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 01:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.932
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aLZvM1hc3j9Z for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 01:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC2A421F949F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 01:05:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Ukrdh-0005lC-Dd for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:03:13 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:03:13 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Ukrdh-0005lC-Dd@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <lear@cisco.com>) id 1UkrdN-0005kO-W9 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:02:54 +0000
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.140]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <lear@cisco.com>) id 1UkrdI-0005F4-7v for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:02:53 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1574; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1370592168; x=1371801768; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject: content-transfer-encoding; bh=pF06KK1PBWDREVfga3lNJQwYCA+wiIUfYbUfUrYfoBM=; b=ktqvUMaO1ZAQjO+EBcGFVTdcVxvGiqeSBdvR8/413NRW6AJGFUsQyYsQ hb5b/M/YUgW5bAfN+ORJ/JF7EBPOjI7RHA2V89h1PCMU1U3GO41FkQv60 QgmXX3MJqDFL7BRGFriiRxeoZ8OVQrVGJhhnsgoxdtd078n1JE2a08tlt U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFABiTsVGQ/khR/2dsb2JhbABZgwkwgzy8NBZ0gk2BCwIFIQIRAiwgDQgBAYgJmxSOeZFpgSaQWoEUA5c/kUCDETo
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,820,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="155048042"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Jun 2013 08:02:05 +0000
Received: from mctiny.local ([10.61.203.109]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r57822Ij028720 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 08:02:02 GMT
Message-ID: <51B1937B.70808@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:02:03 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=144.254.224.140; envelope-from=lear@cisco.com; helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.347, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UkrdI-0005F4-7v 98e182a6ce3735706de9107db89b84e3
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: port #?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/51B1937B.70808@cisco.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18193
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 everyone,

I note that we still haven't cleaned up the connection model
sufficiently.  When someone implements a specification they need to know
at least the port number to connect to. This is the document that has to
specify at least at a bare minimum how that happens.  This can be
handled in at least one of four ways:

1.  We refer to RFC-2616 normatively.  This implies that we will not
obsolete 2616 at this time.  If we do so later we would need to pull the
HTTP URI definition out and update the IANA definition.
2.  We pull the HTTP URI definition out and produce a small document for
it separately and refer to that, updating RFC-2616.
3.  We include the URI definition in the HTTP2 draft.
4.  We abstract the connection model entirely from the document.
5.  We specify that unless specified within a URI, the default protocol
is TCP and the default port is 80.

This all came to light because of interest to do some work with HTTP2
using something other than TCP.  Thus, one might thing that [4] is the
appropriate thing to do, but my experience with BEEP is that it lends
itself to an ugly set of documents and violates the KISS principle.  To
that end, I recommend the text in [5] be added for now, and that as
HTTP2 matures we consider [2] later.

Specifically, OLD:

   The HTTP/2.0 session runs atop TCP ([RFC0793]).  The client is the
   TCP connection initiator.

NEW:

   Unless otherwise specified within a URI, an HTTP/2.0 session runs
   atop TCP ([RFC0793]) and a client initiates a server on port 80. 

Eliot