Subject: Re: Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-httpbis-alt-svc-13: (with COMMENT)

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 13:59:39 +1100

Hi Spencer,

> A couple of very nitty nits.
> 
> In this text
> 
>   When the protocol does not explicitly carry the scheme (e.g., as is
>   usually the case for HTTP/1.1 over TLS, servers can mitigate this
>                                         ^
> I think there's a missing closing parenthesis right around here.
> 
> If there's not, I'm having trouble parsing the sentence.

Already fixed.

>   risk by either assuming that all requests have an insecure context,
>   or by refraining from advertising alternative services for insecure
>   schemes (such as HTTP).
> 
> If there was an obvious reference for SPDY in this text
> 
>   The Alt-Svc header field was influenced by the design of the
>   Alternate-Protocol header field in SPDY.
> 
> that might be useful to include.

There's a URL; not sure how stable though.

Cheers,

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