IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: draft-fielding-http-key

Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> Thu, 01 October 2015 16:56 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 8C0A11A8793 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:56:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 g8B8W31uFEMM for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:56:36 -0700 (PDT)
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 589561A8785 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:56:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Zhh7c-0003bV-6v for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:54:20 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:54:20 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Zhh7c-0003bV-6v@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <squid3@treenet.co.nz>) id 1Zhh7X-0003Zr-4w for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:54:15 +0000
Received: from 121-99-228-82.static.orcon.net.nz ([121.99.228.82] helo=treenet.co.nz) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <squid3@treenet.co.nz>) id 1Zhh7T-0004Bp-7e for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:54:14 +0000
Received: from [192.168.20.251] (unknown [121.98.42.176]) by treenet.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550D0E6E21 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 04:53:43 +1200 (NZST)
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
References: <EFF24778-0AF9-40AF-AB08-85367FEB527A@mnot.net>
From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Message-ID: <560D64F9.9040105@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 05:53:13 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EFF24778-0AF9-40AF-AB08-85367FEB527A@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=121.99.228.82; envelope-from=squid3@treenet.co.nz; helo=treenet.co.nz
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.153, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, TVD_RCVD_IP=0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Zhh7T-0004Bp-7e fff1f1ce05b095ec260cacd2ddebf02e
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: draft-fielding-http-key
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/560D64F9.9040105@treenet.co.nz>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30306
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>

On 1/10/2015 6:22 p.m., Mark Nottingham wrote:
> We discussed this document in Dallas:
>   <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fielding-http-key>
> ... as well as on and off since then.
> 
> Based on the feedback received and after discussion with our Area Director, I believe that we should adopt this document as a WG product, with a target of Proposed Standard. 
> 
> Since I'm an author on the document, I've asked Martin Thomson to be Document Shepherd, to help judge consensus both of the CfA and during the document's LC, should we adopt it. He has graciously agreed.
> 
> Please comment on-list; we’ll make a decision about adoption at the end of next week. The result of this CfA will also help us determine how to go forward with the Client Hints document.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 

I am in favour of adopting it.

Amos

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email