Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Provisional registration of 5 X-Device-* HTTP Header fields for use in content transformation guidelines

SM <sm@resistor.net> Wed, 12 August 2009 07:06 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
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 C9BF43A695D for <ietf-message-headers@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:06:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.390, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 yr8Ihwzbd0w2 for <ietf-message-headers@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:06:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns1.qubic.net (ns1.qubic.net [208.69.177.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D693A63D3 for <ietf-message-headers@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:06:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from subman.resistor.net ([10.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns1.qubic.net (8.14.4.Beta0/8.14.4.Beta0) with ESMTP id n7C6rKJM027106 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1250060009; x=1250146409; bh=Pwe3+si63EFdFH/tLDVPkreee9y5a97ZIO77WNkxp8E=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=LR2gQiEhVvIJXYfSnYx2Yb69iPPxQEmSOMvjyhYZSx9Oxu2BLo7jM9dBtGbIj8Ati xxoUtkKcwXX3CcbYJm7heVzFvYqzadGqBxDodMXbNUvcLnPvSowUyEULNQCgzN4lqE 5QZZjsJL7nsjlF6s5xLhuwKd2Bkxdfdm2QmvdcPk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=mail; d=resistor.net; c=simple; q=dns; b=Kl3Ffx4JTeDwjiqaVpR3UEfgrWrGY/Qr49QzFPXkY0yQt1gO/FXEydXs6D08IkT9l 0conKZ8uBh9bTx0iHb8KlxcgpC6+vAnianV2u56qta/SWR+SpxinGwb4foA9jdiL5QB P82SsZs/mzLyx6Sdw9y5FeHCjXJgosJzRlKRk9I=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20090811224922.02b803d8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:38:40 -0700
To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <4A786244.2000508@w3.org>
References: <4A55C127.8030609@w3.org> <4A572B0A.5020104@ninebynine.org> <4A575F8C.7070907@w3.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20090710090140.02a0f0c8@resistor.net> <4A786244.2000508@w3.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, ietf-message-headers@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ietf-message-headers] Provisional registration of 5 X-Device-* HTTP Header fields for use in content transformation guidelines
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: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:06:40 -0000

Hi Francois,
At 09:31 04-08-2009, Francois Daoust wrote:
>At this point, the working group agrees on having one convention 
>among the existing ones, which unfortunately all start with "X-". 
>But the working group does not agree to do away with the "X-" not to 
>introduce any kind of new notation. If you're fine with it, the 
>group would thus like to proceed only with the registration of the 
>"X-" versions of the HTTP header fields.

The alternatives are:

   (i) Reject the request as "X-" message header fields names are 
generally not registered in the provisional and permanent Message 
Header Fields registries given that "X-" message header field names 
are reserved for private use.

  (ii) Accept the request for the registration of the five 
"X-Device-*" message header fields in the provisional Message Header 
Field Names registry with a "depreciated" status.

There aren't any "X-" headers in the Permanent Message Header Field 
Names registry.  As the working group does not agree to do away with 
the "X-", there may be a request to register the five "X-Device-*" 
message header fields as permanent Message Header field names.  I 
suggest using the first alternative as the working group does not 
plan to obsolete the five "X-Device-*" HTTP Header fields.

Regards,
-sm