Re: ABNF related feedback to: Re: AD review of draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-10

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Sun, 03 January 2016 22:38 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACEA21A1AB6 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:38:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.012
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.012 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable
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 vnO6bI5ftm9b for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:38:50 -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 D83971A1AB5 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:38:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1aFrEd-0006V6-70 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:34:47 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:34:47 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1aFrEd-0006V6-70@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) 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 1aFrEa-0006UG-HA for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:34:44 +0000
Received: from mail-ig0-f179.google.com ([209.85.213.179]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1aFrEZ-0001mZ-Ca for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:34:44 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f179.google.com with SMTP id mw1so95274903igb.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 14:34:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/usVcvMJ4ffFbeTsWgMIQMFNOtmOfNQWGhzNWwGsLQE=; b=bU/ea5KfAJ3CjNe4QcX6IxtKygm/BTIcJto4joN2CobqMuQWatdEZ3+J6ATcadhGlL q7/ULTFiri2mJ6QCW1HNuYY+jV9wJw6CuyJvhjsOjAo9375TUYbuW1aydZQaB3Hvtkcv KHeEOUDRPs2o7QhjKi/iXqNYtUg9sCSPgXLI41imoWhRer16E4jrbzv7Bw2ihySuUSui /FiX8F3NywJKhnPuF9sNwScrN6kUI877wusv3wsN9237GzInQZ3St7pWCLtLk1WdgHir emzC4Gz3B43XOvL9Hin2Bej9uGyCltUdN7cHwcoK59yrk2U4JMCga2pz561vSwYOjwL6 a0tA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.79.196 with SMTP id l4mr82714755igx.77.1451860457494; Sun, 03 Jan 2016 14:34:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.36.149.130 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:34:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <568924B8.3000402@gmx.de>
References: <CALaySJK5fYy_JCv0Y7Fs3QpPk95fUxyt272JMc-QUpVKO7_gJA@mail.gmail.com> <56853BCC.7030005@gmx.de> <CALaySJJxbDX0m2XurAXe0+DoC4iDam8CXOv4B3Gr1+NGk+Nzow@mail.gmail.com> <56855F2E.6020300@gmx.de> <568924B8.3000402@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 09:34:17 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnV4HiS9UxgzB1Sy1dSdG90dXVR8_3i4AF1gxZrG+xVarQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.213.179; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-ig0-f179.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=1.838, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1aFrEZ-0001mZ-Ca 060e1e7043e0de8be754c66a42c63df0
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: ABNF related feedback to: Re: AD review of draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-10
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnV4HiS9UxgzB1Sy1dSdG90dXVR8_3i4AF1gxZrG+xVarQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30844
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 January 2016 at 00:40, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> So what does the rest of the WG think? Should we use this bleading-edge ABNF
> feature?

This seems to be a matter that comes down to editorial discretion.
And I suspect that you and Barry are the ones who care.