Subject: Draft agenda for the HTTPBis BOF

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:19:15 +0100

Greetings,
Mark Nottingham and I will be chairing the HTTPBis BOF in Chicago.

At this point I would like to solicit comments about the following 
agenda proposal:
================================================================
Agenda bashing, etc.                                   ( 5 mins)

Technical presentations:

Review of draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-03.txt:
status and open issues                                 (25 mins)
Review of existing HTTP authentication
mechanisms: draft-sayre-http-security-variance-00.txt  (20 mins)
Review of issues with HTTP caching and cookies         (15 mins)

Discussions about the proposed WG Charter:

General discussion about formation of the WG           (10 mins)
- if no interest in the WG, then spend more time
 on discussing 2616bis issues

Is revision of RFC 2617 in scope for the WG?           (30 mins)
Should rewrite of RFC 2616 be allowed?                 (20 mins)
Other issues with the proposed Charter                 (10 mins)
Closing discussion about formation of the WG           (15 mins)
================================================================
Total:                                                 150 mins
================================================================

In particular, let me and Mark know if you think that some items should 
be added or deleted.

A couple of comments on this:

The agenda consists of two parts: technical presentations at the 
beginning and charter discussion at the end.
Technical presentations should provide information on various documents 
that *might* be in scope for the proposed WG. Mark and I will poll BOF 
participants on whether various documents should be in scope for the 
proposed WG, out-of-scope or whether they can be done later.

Also pay attention to the "General discussion about formation of the WG" 
item. The idea is that if it is clear at this point that there is no 
interest in formation of one or more HTTP related WGs, then the 
remaining time can be spent on detailed discussion of various issues in 
draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-03.txt.

Regards,
Alexey

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 21:22:46 -0700

Updated; see:
   http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07jul/agenda/httpbis.txt

For those not onsite, see:
   http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/  (we're channel 5)
   http://www3.ietf.org/meetings/text_conf.html

Cheers,

On 09/07/2007, at 7:19 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:

> In particular, let me and Mark know if you think that some items  
> should be added or deleted.
>
> Technical presentations should provide information on various  
> documents that *might* be in scope for the proposed WG. Mark and I  
> will poll BOF participants on whether various documents should be  
> in scope for the proposed WG, out-of-scope or whether they can be  
> done later.
>
> Also pay attention to the "General discussion about formation of  
> the WG" item. The idea is that if it is clear at this point that  
> there is no interest in formation of one or more HTTP related WGs,  
> then the remaining time can be spent on detailed discussion of  
> various issues in draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-03.txt.
>
> Regards,
> Alexey
>
>
>

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