IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication

Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com> Wed, 24 April 2013 14:46 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 19E4821F8BD4 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 FICoOSvehfZv for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE7B21F8A0B for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UV0wK-0001a0-G5 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:44:56 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:44:56 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UV0wK-0001a0-G5@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bizzbyster@gmail.com>) id 1UV0wB-0001Y2-A5 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:44:47 +0000
Received: from mail-vb0-f48.google.com ([209.85.212.48]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bizzbyster@gmail.com>) id 1UV0w3-0000Sv-D2 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:44:47 +0000
Received: by mail-vb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id p13so1706119vbe.21 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=inBFCNLHqyqOSDEISLe/e2DyINAYbcZ9VLYA0xjc2KA=; b=Ej08ViBuwKPngWEl7v9tG6sM8ilz3yv1OFdPnd+qVV0snN2m1rIWEhvQx+6BNXG3dR BiYlGpqov2AG8lZ0PuLR6neiv8ErLwhjyL6pYNk/dEFFcaze93Sit4i7ovt6MbU5zHDz l5trAzMJyeh8qLBAA7dq7SRk3nc7Z6HvTa5pb7WbUZyWGu0fMChIEAclo9XCxtt1RIwo foZja+tC4XAUuTi1seEqNMTCP/F3OuI9v6LigxCEqL0ydDtIzx1WKwgsCTLCFMShjI1b KFfBthH2F8fqlFflZx9HsQmiHVIi/X9bjoYzeWibTWpl7yol6k6oIuBgAaxtrEOpEYTg 1cyg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.59.11.199 with SMTP id ek7mr25465458ved.19.1366814653758; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.59.10.227 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 07:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAA4WUYjDoRFwPJNWzRqQHdBbV+DjF0mv8OO4RWTBSmh6=Dcnxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <14A09626-8397-4656-A042-FEFDDD017C9F@mnot.net> <CANmPAYH60+wmeYQAikUd4ps3HdPQSm80TeZbMW37LioBYVj-7A@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYjOPgCse6giEmy3f_MzRTC3K25oAWeAavHnzywc5pL91w@mail.gmail.com> <CANmPAYGr8QDhmLR50UzWYWK_fNYzGbF_P9EN0dOadmL-wQy61g@mail.gmail.com> <CAA4WUYjDoRFwPJNWzRqQHdBbV+DjF0mv8OO4RWTBSmh6=Dcnxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:44:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CANmPAYEirEfpM6kEuxaM3OF7hsjWu8_Lr0aWfQ+btkEGOH3Vsw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com>
To: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bd6b156e97bdb04db1c55b3"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.212.48; envelope-from=bizzbyster@gmail.com; helo=mail-vb0-f48.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1UV0w3-0000Sv-D2 323eb68c713a11db3303bb1bdceda974
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Reminder: Call for Proposals - HTTP/2.0 and HTTP Authentication
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CANmPAYEirEfpM6kEuxaM3OF7hsjWu8_Lr0aWfQ+btkEGOH3Vsw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17535
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 William,

Is this draft by Roberto Peon the one you were referring to?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rpeon-httpbis-exproxy-00

Has this gone anywhere?

I'm looking to design and build a "trusted proxy" that aligns with the
browser development roadmap/vision in order to provide web acceleration
functionality and so would like to get involved in this process if still
active.

Thanks,

Peter


On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:57 PM, William Chan (陈智昌)
<willchan@chromium.org>wrote:

> On the contrary, I think it's great to have multiple proposals. If you
> have your own vision for how this should work, please send it out! :) My
> statement was simply an FYI, not a "back off, we've got this!"
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Perfect then I'll sit tight.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:43 PM, William Chan (陈智昌) <
>> willchan@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>>> FYI, we (google spdy team) have been discussing a "trusted proxy"
>>> internally and I think Roberto's got a draft in the works.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>
>>>> Earlier this group discussed the idea of a "trusted proxy". Does that
>>>> fall under the HTTP/2.0 category?
>>>>
>>>> I may have some cycles for this.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 1:28 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just a reminder that we're still accepting proposals for:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. HTTP/2.0
>>>>> 2. New HTTP authentication schemes
>>>>>
>>>>> As per our charter <http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/charter/>.
>>>>>
>>>>> So far, we've received the following proposals applicable to HTTP/2.0:
>>>>>  <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/wiki/Http2Proposals>
>>>>>
>>>>> But none yet for authentication schemes:
>>>>>  <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/wiki/HttpAuthProposals>
>>>>>
>>>>> As communicated in Paris, the deadline for proposals is 15 June, 2012.
>>>>> It's fine if your proposal isn't complete, but we do need to have a  good
>>>>> sense of it by then, for discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email