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

Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net> Fri, 27 April 2012 08:43 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 CF8EF21F86F2 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 01:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067]
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 5HmlE6QK3KjU for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 01:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC0B21F86F1 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 01:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1SNgjr-0005Gd-0D for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:41:15 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org>) id 1SNgjh-0005Fm-8q for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:41:05 +0000
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org>) id 1SNgjZ-0007om-Dc for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:41:03 +0000
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org>) id 1SNgjA-0002Pp-E9 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:40:32 +0200
Received: from 163.116.6.10 ([163.116.6.10]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:40:32 +0200
Received: from nicolas.mailhot by 163.116.6.10 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:40:32 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:40:23 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <loom.20120427T100846-677@post.gmane.org>
References: <14A09626-8397-4656-A042-FEFDDD017C9F@mnot.net> <CABP7RbexZk_3RjJ2ACVr6mOYzoS_O-6dqA0BWb7Eg-qqsLsRXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org
User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)
X-Loom-IP: 163.116.6.10 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:12.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/12.0)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gix-ietf-http-wg@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.164, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1SNgjZ-0007om-Dc ccbb79b067610f92a2a5fbdd207c7083
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/loom.20120427T100846-677@post.gmane.org>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/13486
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>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1SNgjr-0005Gd-0D@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 08:41:15 +0000

James M Snell <jasnell@...> writes:

>   For that matter, can we allow extended characters in all the headers
> and use UTF-8 as the default encoding.

> 3. Use ISO-8601/RFC3339 Timestamps for more precise date/time handling

Hear, hear

I don't expect browsers of http servers to care a lot about those, but it would
considerably simplify things for all the rest of the ecosystem if http/2.0
switched from the encoding and timestamp standards that existed decades ago to
the ones that have evolved since (I send yesterday  an RFE to one of our tool
suppliers, enumerating problems we spent months of collecting, and 3/4th of them
were related to naïve encoding or timestamp handling). Please take advantage of
http/2.0 to streamline all of this and dump the baroque solutions that existed
before i18n problems forced the creation of better standards.

Just make text UTF-8 par default, dates ISO-8601 (and UTC!) and add a prefix for
binary headers. This way apps and scripts could finally use common date/text
libraries instead of having to pass everything through http-specific filters
(and have things break whenever the filter if forgotten or the custom filtering
code has bugs)

Best regards

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot