Re: Using extension points without registries, was: [Ietf-message-headers] Last Call Summary on draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 10 January 2011 10:25 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADEE428C129 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:25:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.367
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.367 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.232, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mstWezlgwm4D for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:25:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB493A694F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:25:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1PcExl-0003HE-MH for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:26:57 +0000
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1PcEwg-0003FM-Ar for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:25:50 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22] helo=mail.gmx.net) by lisa.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1PcEwe-0002pZ-Eq for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:25:50 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2011 10:25:16 -0000
Received: from p508FB24D.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.33]) [80.143.178.77] by mail.gmx.net (mp070) with SMTP; 10 Jan 2011 11:25:16 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18epHN121AeXIrM6zjFt9apT3GHf0uF8fSsesprEF dUoonpSAoxlfaj
Message-ID: <4D2ADE8C.7050404@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 11:25:16 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
CC: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <4D280272.6090402@gmail.com> <4D28218A.2020406@gmx.de> <4D283A42.3080303@gmail.com> <4D2847E1.9090004@gmx.de> <4D288998.9020001@gmail.com> <4D289DC9.70208@gmx.de> <4D29543D.5060503@gmail.com> <4D298BDD.40209@gmx.de> <5139EF8D-DA8B-4DB9-9172-2303C8DFC394@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4D29A405.9090602@gmx.de> <AANLkTimPS6afGoP8W-YU6C5m-wHoQOXAx4xVptCkwFM+@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimPS6afGoP8W-YU6C5m-wHoQOXAx4xVptCkwFM+@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass
X-SPF-Guess: pass
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1PcEwe-0002pZ-Eq 59884c101aee1481ff444b84e68e1978
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Using extension points without registries, was: [Ietf-message-headers] Last Call Summary on draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4D2ADE8C.7050404@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/10035
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@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-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1PcExl-0003HE-MH@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:26:57 +0000

On 10.01.2011 08:42, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> First of all, how could anubody applied for warning code if there was
> no popssibility to do that? RFC2616 mentiined no ways to do that. I

You write an Internet Draft, and as part of the draft you note that 
there's currently no registry, and that somebody needs to deal with that 
(maybe yourself by defining it, by using the RFC "updates" relation, or 
by asking the IESG or the Working Group for feedback).

But the first step should be to actually show that a new Warning code is 
needed. Could you please do that first?

> propose to create such regsitry since I have some ideas as for new
> Warning codes.
>
> I do not share the opinion of those who say we have nothing to place
> there. RFC2616 mentioned nearly 5 Warning codes that should be put in
> such regsitry.

RFC2616 defines Warning Codes. But that doesn't necessarily mean a 
registry is needed.

> ...

Best regards, Julian