IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [#150] Making certain settings mandatory

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Sat, 29 June 2013 20:49 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 91FBE21F9F6C for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 13:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.025
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.025 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.573, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 Uq8N5Owc3jsu for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 13:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B988121F9CB1 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 13:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Ut24Z-0007wN-3u for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 20:48:43 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 20:48:43 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Ut24Z-0007wN-3u@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <lear@cisco.com>) id 1Ut24K-0007tX-6g for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 20:48:28 +0000
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.140]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <lear@cisco.com>) id 1Ut24J-0008Ue-9a for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 20:48:28 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1583; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1372538907; x=1373748507; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=CpzT2kJ1qKsL+6kqDPAj1NUcuqGaP18XTWW5Q2yJ5hM=; b=HETi4bQGarEbldYZVAlEwQw/bPLNFmElrhLASrOU18ECyU046qa9C+PM 4gen1cHEwlkf7TJ4Sct0XBywdgJOPMrUG08XRB8/Yn1OmC8EqmUOmxCIy pz9d6sqdtzE8XCASdKYMv/riYKVhMkAEJ9MVkFv0m9leT+wdkMboee3Ca Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnEFAChHz1GQ/khL/2dsb2JhbAAYQoMJMoNQhV22LoEAFnSCGgkBAQEEI1UBEAsDAQoKCRYLAgIJAwIBAgErGgYNAQcBAYgLjAaddpBljjmBJQeCUYEWA5dIkUWDEzqBLg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.87,967,1363132800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="155931201"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Jun 2013 20:47:57 +0000
Received: from mctiny.local ([10.61.175.152]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5TKlsif008149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 29 Jun 2013 20:47:55 GMT
Message-ID: <51CF47FA.7050508@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 22:47:54 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
CC: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <CABkgnnW2xi3pAKyg2Abi15Gb11ZCFi+D_QUQw1566BVXb65iHg@mail.gmail.com> <CABaLYCs8vb35CoL+A4mh7-PkbnKXxjz+jCJ_z-ivzYnYKF=VWQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+pLO_gFrAow2==sZx8_57Hw81d24V4HaqJCEc63WhZSAoWdBA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNd9dVzRBv1iXS59XQEkk32rK9EtfQs=c1rp+yYHSbG5dQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+pLO_ijfgbkYEKXn3xUq5-Kxw69k4oQhMc8+fL5tTtenN2x3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNfO140h4UgS55P6Ouj2vEc7ZCZzGTBOWRD7+1DigRNUMw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+pLO_hpmFbDNyaPgi3JhtRSdKnTEGsv0_NXxL2BTJfUJ4xStw@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNeq+xUKjVU3uLFGy-2uozErq5fbJ20bD85zNvz=PHJqSQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+pLO_iEcHBxvXed+=wh5FpTLcu=c5Rr78Wo9WQvnEx6yJ40Jw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+pLO_iEcHBxvXed+=wh5FpTLcu=c5Rr78Wo9WQvnEx6yJ40Jw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090103050307090905040905"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=144.254.224.140; envelope-from=lear@cisco.com; helo=ams-iport-1.cisco.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.028, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.303, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1Ut24J-0008Ue-9a 7305d98d00cd67fc9dc3c479a94057c5
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [#150] Making certain settings mandatory
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/51CF47FA.7050508@cisco.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/18428
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 6/29/13 9:47 PM, Jeff Pinner wrote:
> So devil's advocate -- why make the mandatory during Upgrade?
>
> If the client is upgrading to HTTP/2.0 and doesn't send them, why
> can't we just assume that the client has accepted the default values?
>

Because defaults can NEVER be changed.  Sometimes it's better to not
ever have them.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email