Re: registration request for dns-prefetch, preconnect, prefetch, and prerender link relation types

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Sun, 31 January 2016 02:11 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A72A51B3E03 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 18:11:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 bk-qSSXL9fY8 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 18:11:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C57761B3DFE for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 18:11:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [120.149.194.112]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49FAD22E25F; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 21:10:58 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Subject: Re: registration request for dns-prefetch, preconnect, prefetch, and prerender link relation types
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <56A70E6F.7030409@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 13:10:56 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FDE9F2CB-ABD5-4F21-A26A-CEABD40A3B24@mnot.net>
References: <56A6C3CD.6060802@dret.net> <56A70E6F.7030409@gmx.de>
To: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/link-relations/Kdc-9mWLEE8ClLHFwjhogxaOjik>
Cc: link-relations <link-relations@ietf.org>, Erik Wilde <erik.wilde@dret.net>
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/link-relations/>
List-Post: <mailto:link-relations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 02:11:06 -0000

My .02 -

5988 doesn't require strong justification for registering a relation type; only that it follows certain rules. So, I'd say the fact that these relations went through an open process is enough to overcome any reluctance to register so many.

Talking about the context of the link is nice; see existing registry entries for examples.

WRT 7.4 - the applicable text in 5988 is:

"""
Registered relation types MUST NOT constrain the media type of the
   context IRI, and MUST NOT constrain the available representation
   media types of the target IRI.  However, they can specify the
   behaviours and properties of the target resource (e.g., allowable
   HTTP methods, request and response media types that must be
   supported).
"""

Putting RFC1918 language in registry entries is a bit weird too.

So something like this would be clearer:

"""
Indicates a resource that might be required by the next navigation, and that user agents ought to fetch and execute to improve performance.
"""

Cheers,


> On 26 Jan 2016, at 5:13 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> My gut reaction is: why do we need a whopping 5 link relations (including preload)?
> 
> 7.1 and 7.2 look very similar; they also need to talk about the link context's origin so that people are not tempted to insert just the origin.
> 
> 7.3 and 7.4 look very similar as well; 7.4 also needs to be rephrased to be independent of the media type.
> 
> Best regards, Julian
> 
> 
> On 2016-01-26 01:54, Erik Wilde wrote:
>> hello link-relations.
>> 
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-resource-hints-20160126/#iana-considerations
>> defines 4 new link relation types that should be added to the IANA link
>> relation registry. here is an excerpt with the link relation type
>> descriptions:
>> 
>> -------------------------------------
>> 
>> 7.1 dns-prefetch Link Relation Type
>> 
>> Relation Name: dns-prefetch
>> Description: The dns-prefetch link relation type is used to indicate an
>> origin that will be used to fetch required resources, and that the user
>> agent SHOULD resolve as early as possible.
>> 
>> 7.2 preconnect Link Relation Type
>> 
>> Relation Name: preconnect
>> Description: The preconnect link relation type is used to indicate an
>> origin that will be used to fetch required resources. Initiating an
>> early connection, which includes the DNS lookup, TCP handshake, and
>> optional TLS negotiation, allows the user agent to mask the high latency
>> costs of establishing a connection.
>> 
>> 7.3 prefetch Link Relation Type
>> 
>> Relation Name: prefetch
>> Description: The prefetch link relation type is used to declare a
>> resource that might be required by the next navigation, and that the
>> user agent SHOULD fetch, such that the user agent can deliver a faster
>> response once the resource is requested in the future.
>> 
>> 7.4 prerender Link Relation Type
>> 
>> Relation Name: prerender
>> Description: The prerender link relation type is used to declare an HTML
>> resource that might be required by the next navigation, and that the
>> user agent SHOULD fetch and execute, such that the user agent can
>> deliver faster response and processing once the resource is requested in
>> the future.
>> 
>> -------------------------------------
>> 
>> if there are any concerns or questions about these link relations types,
>> please let us know.
>> 
>> thanks a lot and cheers,
>> 
>> dret.
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> link-relations mailing list
> link-relations@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/