Subject: Migrating CONNECT and Upgrade details from RFC2817

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:16:53 +0200

In Maastricht, we discussed moving selected parts of RFC2817 into HTTPbis; specifically

CONNECT - http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/239
Upgrade - http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/240

Alexey stated we don't need to have a charter change for this, since we'll be elaborating what is (poorly) defined in 2616 using current practice. It's also likely that this will result in 2817 being moved to historic status, since no one uses it as a framework (i.e., they just use CONNECT and perhaps Upgrade separately, in other ways).

Cheers,

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

---

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:06:46 +0000

This sounds like a great idea.

Henrik

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Mark Nottingham
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 3:17 AM
To: HTTP Working Group
Subject: Migrating CONNECT and Upgrade details from RFC2817

Cheers,

---

From: Willy Tarreau <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:17:09 +0200

> This sounds like a great idea.

I second this. It was painful to have to refer to other RFCs when
implementing generic HTTP gateways !

Willy

---

From: Daniel Stenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:00:27 +0200 (CEST)

> Upgrade - http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/240

I'd love to see this happen.

I've always thought CONNECT was treated weirdly and while I can't remember off 
the top of my head just now I also recall that I've been been unhappy with the 
specs for it in the past.

I figure the recent popularity of Upgrade in the Hybi team could also be a 
independent reason for looking over how that is specified, used and followed 
in real life.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se