Subject: [httpapi] Call for Agenda Items for IETF 110

From: Darrel Miller <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 03:02:43 +0000

Dear httpapi,

We will be meeting online during the IETF-110 week (08 Mar 2021 - 12 Mar 2021). Please note that whilst this meeting will be online, there will be fees for attendance (though much lower than for in-person attendance): https://registration.ietf.org/110/ . Note that there is a significant discount for full-time students and fee waivers are available for those for whom these fees pose a problem (everything is in the link).

With this e-mail I would also like to call for agenda items for the meeting. If you would like to present please express your intent on the mailing list or by contacting the chairs by 26 February.  Due to the fairly compressed timeline of our last meeting, for this meeting we have scheduled 2 hours.

Guidelines for presenters can be found here: https://github.com/ietf-wg-httpapi/wg-materials<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fietf-wg-httpapi%2Fwg-materials&data=04%7C01%7CDarrel.Miller%40microsoft.com%7C9a947501e97b4450b57308d8bfd07a8f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637470249423035539%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=7MbZoUm7ZuvP0vYGNbRV%2BcirPswwzDlNR0uIM0%2Bph8Q%3D&reserved=0>

Regards,

Darrel

---

From: Erik Wilde <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 09:38:41 +0100

hello darrel.

thanks for getting us started for IETF 110!

On 2021-01-26 04:02, Darrel Miller wrote:
> With this e-mail I would also like to call for agenda items for the 
> meeting. If you would like to present please express your intent on the 
> mailing list or by contacting the chairs by 26 February.  Due to the 
> fairly compressed timeline of our last meeting, for this meeting we have 
> scheduled 2 hours.

like at IETF 109, i'd like to request slots for three drafts:

- 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpapi-deprecation-header/ 
has been adopted as a group draft since the last meeting and i am not 
aware of open issues around it. maybe we can simply bring it up and 
provide the group with a last chance to give their feedback. if no new 
issues are raised, this draft probably can go to last call. or is that 
even something we can do on the list and then use IETF 110 as a place to 
wrap things up?

- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpapi-linkset/ also has 
been adopted as a group draft since the last meeting. we still have a 
few minor issues we need to add to the repo. but as you've seen from 
phil archer's message, we now have a major implementation out, so it 
would be great to try to wrap it up and maybe use IETF 110 as a last 
opportunity to give feedback and raise issues.

- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cedik-http-warning/ was 
proposed as a group draft last time and has been mentioned on the list 
in a variety of messages (in the context of discussing possible 
refinements/additions to the RFC 7807 model). maybe it would be good to 
bring up the draft again (even though there hasn't been a new version 
since IETF 109) to once again gauge interest, and to also see if/how it 
can be aligned with ongoing efforts around exposing warning/error 
conditions.

i may or may not be presenter for these slots. all three drafts have 
co-authors, and i'd be more than happy to step back and let the 
co-authors present.

thanks and cheers,

dret.

-- 
erik wilde | mailto:[email-masked] |
            | http://dret.net/netdret    |
            | http://twitter.com/dret    |