Re: Last Call: <draft-nottingham-safe-hint-05.txt> (The "safe" HTTP Preference) to Proposed Standard

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

I think doing this is a bad idea and commented on that before
on apps-discuss. [1] (Start of that mega-thread is [2])

I think all the same objections apply other than the one that
called for the discussion to be had here rather than in appsawg.
(And thanks Barry for doing that.)

S.

[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg12628.html
[2] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg12512.html

On 21/10/14 22:33, The IESG wrote:
> 
> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
> the following document:
> - 'The "safe" HTTP Preference'
>   <draft-nottingham-safe-hint-05.txt> as Proposed Standard
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> [e-mail] mailing lists by 2014-11-18. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> 
> Abstract
> 
> 
>    This specification defines a "safe" preference for HTTP requests,
>    expressing a desire to avoid "objectionable" content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The file can be obtained via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-safe-hint/
> 
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-safe-hint/ballot/
> 
> 
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> 
> 
> 
>