IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolution?

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Tue, 29 June 2021 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4F1B3A3F22 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 16:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.398, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 H5GfhYQ_zKQf for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 16:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DA343A3EBC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 16:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 15TNOxxg018317 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 29 Jun 2021 19:25:04 -0400
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 16:24:58 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: 'IETF Discussion Mailing List' <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolution?
Message-ID: <20210629232458.GG17170@mit.edu>
References: <CAMm+LwiFajxuV3E_u7b-f=7DqTHXG_4Y=VLoCsUxknD_mCp1=Q@mail.gmail.com> <00722e06-a385-251c-d95d-2ff67e83f5c1@foobar.org> <CAMm+LwgwwX4zhqqH27FtBEyKRn74BdunswpembR_O6R34vTuSA@mail.gmail.com> <00c401d76d3d$0477c630$0d675290$@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <00c401d76d3d$0477c630$0d675290$@acm.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/jgt9SsBX2SVbTtyDligefN8iJGU>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 23:25:13 -0000

On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 04:18:05PM -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:
> Building Blocks for HTTP APIs (httpapi) - (ietf.org) <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/httpapi/about/> 
> 
> Might be a more evolutionary approach.
> 
> Perhaps an update to BCP 56 (RFC 3205) might be in order.

Today's your lucky day, as one is currently in AD Evaluation:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-bcp56bis/

-Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email