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

"Benoit Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com> Sat, 05 March 2016 12:56 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 B7F891B30A8 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Mar 2016 04:56:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, 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 eb1cbpvdXLOE for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Mar 2016 04:56:40 -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 549ED1B30A3 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Mar 2016 04:56:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1acBhO-0006Cu-4t for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2016 12:52:46 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1acBhO-0006Cu-4t@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 <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1acBhH-0006C2-K1 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2016 12:52:39 +0000
Received: from raoul.w3.org ([128.30.52.128]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1acBhC-0007t0-7W for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2016 12:52:39 +0000
Received: from homard.platy.net ([80.67.176.7] helo=[192.168.1.40]) by raoul.w3.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ylafon@w3.org>) id 1acBhB-0009OV-HI for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2016 12:52:33 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Resent-From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 13:19:36 +0000
Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org, Mike Bishop <michael.bishop@microsoft.com>, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, michael.bishop@microsoft.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, shares@ndzh.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2016 13:52:28 +0100
Message-Id: <20160303131851.24634.26082.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Name-Md5: efe3dad792d606410c9cc49cedaffc94
Resent-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1, BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, W3C_NW=0.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1acBhC-0007t0-7W 3ed22bb31c229c9caf0dd6087bb65947
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20160303131851.24634.26082.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/31192
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>

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

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.  

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).