Tag: ietf

Internet for End Users

The IETF community will (I hope) continue to document and explore such principles, informed by shared values. RFC8890 makes a small contribution to this, by asking the IETF community to favor end users of the Internet — in other words, actual people — over other stakeholders that ask for their needs to be met, when there’s a conflict.

IETF is past prime

So if the objective of the IETF is to foster the development of Internet Standards specifications, then strictly speaking it has not enjoyed a very stellar record over its 30-year history. Almost one half of these Internet Standard specifications were generated in the 1980s (42 RFCs have original publication dates in the 1980s), just 19 in the 1900’s and 26 in the 2000’s. There were none in 2010, 4 in 2011, 1 in 2012, 2 in 2013, 1 in 2014, and none in 2015. There have been 3 so far in 2016.

HTTP/2

an update on waka

As I mentioned in a earlier post Roy Fielding has started a ASF Lab for Web Architecture that is intended to be a place to work on documentation regarding Web Architecture. This includes existing protocol improvements and Waka a new HTTP upgrade. Waka is still in the head of Roy Fielding and the changes have been alluded to over 8 years in various ApacheCon presentations; in various Apache 2.0 design notes and emails focused mostly around the IO-layer and request-response processing chains in Apache 2.0; emails to rest-discuss and references to various draft RFC and previous HTTP next generation efforts – rHTTP, W3C’s HTTP-NG and Spero’s HTTP-ng.

2007-12-07:

Another reason to revise HTTP is that there’s a lot of things that the spec doesn’t say. The people who were there in the late 90’s understand the context, and those who have been around HTTP enough have learned to understand the thinking behind its design and the intent of its features. However, there’s a whole new generation of implementers and extension builders who haven’t been exposed to this. If we can document the philosophy of HTTP with regard to extensibility, error handling, etc., they have a better chance of understanding the right way to use it.

i want waka 🙂
2014-01-11:

I wrote up a wall of text about HTTP/2 tradeoffs. It makes for good bedtime reading, puts you to sleep in no time.

The geoURI scheme

The ‘geo’ Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) scheme is another step into that direction and aims to facilitate, support and standardize part of the interaction with geospatial services and applications. Accessing information about or trigger further services based on a particular place on earth shouldn’t be any harder than writing an email by clicking on a ‘mailto:’ link.