Re: Issue 271 of 5987bis - Proposed Standard or Internet Standard?

Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com> Tue, 31 January 2017 08:59 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E88126D74 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:59:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ga-FF9yaToth for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:59:22 -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 75950126D73 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:59:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cYUEY-0000q5-DY for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:56:14 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:56:14 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cYUEY-0000q5-DY@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>) id 1cYUET-0000pI-4e for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:56:09 +0000
Received: from www.ducksong.com ([192.155.95.102] helo=linode64.ducksong.com) by titan.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>) id 1cYUEM-0001WZ-Mr for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:56:03 +0000
Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com (mail-qk0-f174.google.com [209.85.220.174]) by linode64.ducksong.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 026373A021 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 03:55:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 11so156614465qkl.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:55:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLFUpmC2uVcV+XlGGyQIcvhr6f4netn6mevqjgOBGF24y+zT2/5eo2cN4OD1npr0fSH5x73hC8N6qjA1g==
X-Received: by 10.55.157.138 with SMTP id g132mr24457375qke.313.1485852939700; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:55:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.12.162.65 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:55:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVBamPXgKepQBkUo524FUW4psMRzHLqOnY3J_rhkq+YvzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOdDvNr==BmizwUPKaMZq__UckfM5bAJ0w15=A-R1xrtZ+JxjA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnVw9K4DiRySgSjbYcxkEyAqxU9DU3dw4e4+vpEk6ff5Zg@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVBamPXgKepQBkUo524FUW4psMRzHLqOnY3J_rhkq+YvzQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:55:39 +0100
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAOdDvNpM3vRsb5NRcE6EJuVDOP+GAZ9THMEoLqL-3CSfG__WvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNpM3vRsb5NRcE6EJuVDOP+GAZ9THMEoLqL-3CSfG__WvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c06f424a8edee0547601842
Received-SPF: softfail client-ip=192.155.95.102; envelope-from=pmcmanus@mozilla.com; helo=linode64.ducksong.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.617, BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1cYUEM-0001WZ-Mr 493d6e271556866c3c7f761ab4f6e9ea
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Issue 271 of 5987bis - Proposed Standard or Internet Standard?
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CAOdDvNpM3vRsb5NRcE6EJuVDOP+GAZ9THMEoLqL-3CSfG__WvA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33400
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>

Thanks all for the thoughtful replies.  I believe we have consensus for
moving this document forward as a Proposed Standard. I will make the change
in datatracker and leave it to the editor to make the change in the draft.
-Patrick


On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
wrote:

> >> I need to direct your attention to one of just two open issues with the
> >> 5987bis document (Indicating Character Encoding and Language for HTTP
> Header
> >> Field Parameters), which deals with the intended status of the eventual
> RFC.
> >
> > Proposed Standard would seem to be sufficient.  I would think that
> > being MORE mature than HTTP would be unrealistic, so that limits us to
> > PS.
>
> Indeed... and beyond "unrealistic", at least somewhat against IETF
> process.  The document has 7230 and 7231 as normative references, so
> they would qualify as "downrefs" if we should try for Internet
> Standard.  We do have a process -- documented in RFC 3967 -- that
> allows downrefs if they are called out explicitly in last call, but
> that is mostly used for referencing informational documents for
> terminology and such.  3967 is pretty clear that it should *not* be
> used in lieu of moving the less-mature references up in maturity
> first.
>
> We should move the HTTP 1.1 set up to IS before we start trying to
> make other HTTP-related standards IS.
>
> Barry
>