Re: site-wide headers

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Tue, 04 October 2016 09:58 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 05B9912976E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 02:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.517
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 WqJj_p14-7Ho for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 02:58:42 -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 181B1129763 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 02:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1brMQM-0007Ol-8m for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:54:10 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:54:10 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1brMQM-0007Ol-8m@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 <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1brMQJ-0007Nj-3i for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:54:07 +0000
Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1brMQG-00073W-9i for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 09:54:05 +0000
Received: by mail-qk0-f171.google.com with SMTP id t7so187027263qkh.2 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 02:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6/kiUOlaPJp9MbcSEouaZnWs0TQ+kCSVoC9Ht2h6JEM=; b=Y2KybyfnvJN3EuHT420qBo1x98SIipEOpR6iZRmSj9nkiHaorucTEqzzrIb1wSovt/ x2xQV+Vy7XFYauZHXnoIDebz1MiM2oCwPI65CtyMLwtlEFBHnStG2h+wWOJcbrTbY02a 8JPXpd5ALCCfXecZxu74vav1bkU/YJNa1UvD/J6lW0tQJJZzpzZdhHXV7EufNxJnaJz4 XXt8CwNPbBF4uFwZtdCPf+HSAQheMmYLJ52Nd6NCAID0hAHcqgh04R6Tkqfhe40ApCYL 8uAE9+gc//tttmr8iaJj4Jsxz3VsXeI/zA3b8ai4eq41iRUdTGxZ+EYa+WM6L05Xz5gH yNzw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6/kiUOlaPJp9MbcSEouaZnWs0TQ+kCSVoC9Ht2h6JEM=; b=J84/xfRg1fz/jwyAmqgaESuA9g9tcCJg3sdmyO2f/z3bVO/qEbgVSP3+OBs7efAghT EJV8X5ed9G3FeiyB+9yX7EI215f0Wu3RhUHter50BshD9DPn5aX/m8eRKLVFFsq/hV6E 1Vy1IAwuIQzINUmEejmoGNUtcdJzzWx/vR5wr6wLv1oGoB1hKq21RGgIoAf86siFkEw7 Mw5I8/sd6LGshHFqlAl5JdELZEE1SxlO1rHZrtsbJdIMrncTvHWqRB5D26akpfb4A8XL v3uEyo00IE/yWXb3r7G8VuwpaJY12jHXxcCrZ2HwgATAikySYIKn5X/S6VDqsAs58v/c +m/g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RkP5Agnk+G7Z5dCrk6QQr3BvAZR5q6dd+r+KtZudgRVNc5MCyyozg2xbSatDlwHP7sMIbm4KtvMeBw3YQ==
X-Received: by 10.55.155.193 with SMTP id d184mr2675325qke.81.1475574818472; Tue, 04 Oct 2016 02:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.22.146 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Oct 2016 02:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <0885C73D-9C8C-47E2-9F91-6509BCF7C396@mnot.net>
References: <CABkgnnWDys91VF5xCBPc4+J8JQnj75VsGoLVkpXxM60egYd5GQ@mail.gmail.com> <0885C73D-9C8C-47E2-9F91-6509BCF7C396@mnot.net>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 20:53:38 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVkipFnURdsE-C_Aski0M-bm5s=Twiaz3cTfCzJ=wcwtA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.220.171; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk0-f171.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-0.268, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1brMQG-00073W-9i 32382912af62845626c15e5d79fbf1ad
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: site-wide headers
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnVkipFnURdsE-C_Aski0M-bm5s=Twiaz3cTfCzJ=wcwtA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32462
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 4 October 2016 at 19:01, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> I'm not yet convinced which approach is better, but I'm fairly convinced that it should be one or the other ("just headers" or something new), not both.

This is the part that I care about most.  I'm glad you are slowing
working towards a coherent strategy here. :)

>> On balance, I think that this is a distinct improvement.
>
> Please disambiguate "this"?

This draft, and more generally the direction that you and Mike are
exploring.  We've done a lot to "optimize" HTTP over time, and this
could do good things for both performance AND operational use.

(BTW, I'm very interested in having a good transition strategy here.
Expect me to give you heaps of flack over anything that requires
careful matching of two policies.  Especially if that synchronization
doesn't involve copy-paste; I expect tools in a wide array of
languages to accompany any proposal that looks like that.)