Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Last Call Summary on draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Sat, 08 January 2011 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: ietf-message-headers@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-message-headers@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65AD28C13B for <ietf-message-headers@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 09:22:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.433
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.433 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.834, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IW-tEBZJsQCG for <ietf-message-headers@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 09:22:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F16603A67AD for <ietf-message-headers@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Jan 2011 09:22:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Jan 2011 17:24:38 -0000
Received: from p508FA2EB.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.33]) [80.143.162.235] by mail.gmx.net (mp013) with SMTP; 08 Jan 2011 18:24:38 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18ijmc+LegiGv5KI+eQCUTEorMi+I3mKW5T9I2Ss6 Nsufxqq4niug4g
Message-ID: <4D289DC9.70208@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 18:24:25 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
References: <4D280272.6090402@gmail.com> <4D28218A.2020406@gmx.de> <4D283A42.3080303@gmail.com> <4D2847E1.9090004@gmx.de> <4D288998.9020001@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D288998.9020001@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, ietf-message-headers@ietf.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Last Call Summary on draft-yevstifeyev-http-headers-not-recognized
X-BeenThere: ietf-message-headers@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for header fields used in Internet messaging applications." <ietf-message-headers.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers>, <mailto:ietf-message-headers-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-message-headers>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-message-headers@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-message-headers-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-message-headers>, <mailto:ietf-message-headers-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 17:22:36 -0000

On 08.01.2011 16:58, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
> ...
> Many LC comments referred to that it would be uninteresting and useless
> to implement this.  Maybe one of them seems the most interesting for me
> - it said about the 'Warning' headers that should be used in this
> occasion.  This, IMO, is one of the most suitable for me and this
> technology.  But if we implement this now using Warning, one problem is
 > ...

I don't see how (a) using HTTP warnings would resolve the problems other 
people see, (b) how the use of warnings makes this proposal any better, 
nor (c) that warnings are actually applicable here (see 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-12.html#rfc.section.3.6>).

> absence of IANA registry for Warning codes, such as for Status codes.
> As this message is now sent to httpbis WG mailing list, I ask you if
> there is a sense in creating such registry?

We might create a registry when/if when there are actually requests for 
new Warning values.

> ...

Best regards, Julian